Skip to main content
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2014 Sep 17;74(9):3060. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3060-7

Measurement of top quark–antiquark pair production in association with a W or Z boson in pp collisions at s=8TeV

The CMS Collaboration167, V Khachatryan 1, A M Sirunyan 1, A Tumasyan 1, W Adam 2, T Bergauer 2, M Dragicevic 2, J Erö 2, C Fabjan 2, M Friedl 2, R Frühwirth 2, V M Ghete 2, C Hartl 2, N Hörmann 2, J Hrubec 2, M Jeitler 2, W Kiesenhofer 2, V Knünz 2, M Krammer 2, I Krätschmer 2, D Liko 2, I Mikulec 2, D Rabady 2, B Rahbaran 2, H Rohringer 2, R Schöfbeck 2, J Strauss 2, A Taurok 2, W Treberer-Treberspurg 2, W Waltenberger 2, C-E Wulz 2, V Mossolov 3, N Shumeiko 3, J Suarez Gonzalez 3, S Alderweireldt 4, M Bansal 4, S Bansal 4, T Cornelis 4, E A De Wolf 4, X Janssen 4, A Knutsson 4, S Luyckx 4, S Ochesanu 4, B Roland 4, R Rougny 4, M Van De Klundert 4, H Van Haevermaet 4, P Van Mechelen 4, N Van Remortel 4, A Van Spilbeeck 4, F Blekman 5, S Blyweert 5, J D’Hondt 5, N Daci 5, N Heracleous 5, J Keaveney 5, S Lowette 5, M Maes 5, A Olbrechts 5, Q Python 5, D Strom 5, S Tavernier 5, W Van Doninck 5, P Van Mulders 5, G P Van Onsem 5, I Villella 5, C Caillol 6, B Clerbaux 6, G De Lentdecker 6, D Dobur 6, L Favart 6, A P R Gay 6, A Grebenyuk 6, A Léonard 6, A Mohammadi 6, L Perniè 6, T Reis 6, T Seva 6, L Thomas 6, C Vander Velde 6, P Vanlaer 6, J Wang 6, V Adler 7, K Beernaert 7, L Benucci 7, A Cimmino 7, S Costantini 7, S Crucy 7, S Dildick 7, A Fagot 7, G Garcia 7, J Mccartin 7, A A Ocampo Rios 7, D Ryckbosch 7, S Salva Diblen 7, M Sigamani 7, N Strobbe 7, F Thyssen 7, M Tytgat 7, E Yazgan 7, N Zaganidis 7, S Basegmez 8, C Beluffi 8, G Bruno 8, R Castello 8, A Caudron 8, L Ceard 8, G G Da Silveira 8, C Delaere 8, T du Pree 8, D Favart 8, L Forthomme 8, A Giammanco 8, J Hollar 8, P Jez 8, M Komm 8, V Lemaitre 8, C Nuttens 8, D Pagano 8, L Perrini 8, A Pin 8, K Piotrzkowski 8, A Popov 8, L Quertenmont 8, M Selvaggi 8, M Vidal Marono 8, J M Vizan Garcia 8, N Beliy 9, T Caebergs 9, E Daubie 9, G H Hammad 9, W L Aldá Júnior 9, G A Alves 10, L Brito 10, M Correa Martins Junior 10, T Dos Reis Martins 10, C Mora Herrera 10, M E Pol 10, W Carvalho 11, J Chinellato 11, A Custódio 11, E M Da Costa 11, D De Jesus Damiao 11, C De Oliveira Martins 11, S Fonseca De Souza 11, H Malbouisson 11, D Matos Figueiredo 11, L Mundim 11, H Nogima 11, W L Prado Da Silva 11, J Santaolalla 11, A Santoro 11, A Sznajder 11, E J Tonelli Manganote 11, A Vilela Pereira 11, C A Bernardes 12, S Dogra 12, T R Fernandez Perez Tomei 12, E M Gregores 12, P G Mercadante 12, S F Novaes 12, Sandra S Padula 12, A Aleksandrov 13, V Genchev 13, P Iaydjiev 13, A Marinov 13, S Piperov 13, M Rodozov 13, S Stoykova 13, G Sultanov 13, V Tcholakov 13, M Vutova 13, A Dimitrov 14, I Glushkov 14, R Hadjiiska 14, V Kozhuharov 14, L Litov 14, B Pavlov 14, P Petkov 14, J G Bian 15, G M Chen 15, H S Chen 15, M Chen 15, R Du 15, C H Jiang 15, S Liang 15, R Plestina 15, J Tao 15, X Wang 15, Z Wang 15, C Asawatangtrakuldee 16, Y Ban 16, Y Guo 16, Q Li 16, W Li 16, S Liu 16, Y Mao 16, S J Qian 16, D Wang 16, L Zhang 16, W Zou 16, C Avila 17, L F Chaparro Sierra 17, C Florez 17, J P Gomez 17, B Gomez Moreno 17, J C Sanabria 17, N Godinovic 18, D Lelas 18, D Polic 18, I Puljak 18, Z Antunovic 19, M Kovac 19, V Brigljevic 20, K Kadija 20, J Luetic 20, D Mekterovic 20, L Sudic 20, A Attikis 21, G Mavromanolakis 21, J Mousa 21, C Nicolaou 21, F Ptochos 21, P A Razis 21, M Bodlak 22, M Finger 22, M Finger Jr 22, Y Assran 23, A Ellithi Kamel 23, M A Mahmoud 23, A Radi 23, M Kadastik 24, M Murumaa 24, M Raidal 24, A Tiko 24, P Eerola 25, G Fedi 25, M Voutilainen 25, J Härkönen 26, V Karimäki 26, R Kinnunen 26, M J Kortelainen 26, T Lampén 26, K Lassila-Perini 26, S Lehti 26, T Lindén 26, P Luukka 26, T Mäenpää 26, T Peltola 26, E Tuominen 26, J Tuominiemi 26, E Tuovinen 26, L Wendland 26, T Tuuva 27, M Besancon 28, F Couderc 28, M Dejardin 28, D Denegri 28, B Fabbro 28, J L Faure 28, C Favaro 28, F Ferri 28, S Ganjour 28, A Givernaud 28, P Gras 28, G Hamel de Monchenault 28, P Jarry 28, E Locci 28, J Malcles 28, J Rander 28, A Rosowsky 28, M Titov 28, S Baffioni 29, F Beaudette 29, P Busson 29, C Charlot 29, T Dahms 29, M Dalchenko 29, L Dobrzynski 29, N Filipovic 29, A Florent 29, R Granier de Cassagnac 29, L Mastrolorenzo 29, P Miné 29, C Mironov 29, I N Naranjo 29, M Nguyen 29, C Ochando 29, P Paganini 29, S Regnard 29, R Salerno 29, J B Sauvan 29, Y Sirois 29, C Veelken 29, Y Yilmaz 29, A Zabi 29, J-L Agram 30, J Andrea 30, A Aubin 30, D Bloch 30, J-M Brom 30, E C Chabert 30, C Collard 30, E Conte 30, J-C Fontaine 30, D Gelé 30, U Goerlach 30, C Goetzmann 30, A-C Le Bihan 30, P Van Hove 30, S Gadrat 31, S Beauceron 32, N Beaupere 32, G Boudoul 32, E Bouvier 32, S Brochet 32, C A Carrillo Montoya 32, J Chasserat 32, R Chierici 32, D Contardo 32, P Depasse 32, H El Mamouni 32, J Fan 32, J Fay 32, S Gascon 32, M Gouzevitch 32, B Ille 32, T Kurca 32, M Lethuillier 32, L Mirabito 32, S Perries 32, J D Ruiz Alvarez 32, D Sabes 32, L Sgandurra 32, V Sordini 32, M Vander Donckt 32, P Verdier 32, S Viret 32, H Xiao 32, Z Tsamalaidze 33, C Autermann 34, S Beranek 34, M Bontenackels 34, M Edelhoff 34, L Feld 34, O Hindrichs 34, K Klein 34, A Ostapchuk 34, A Perieanu 34, F Raupach 34, J Sammet 34, S Schael 34, H Weber 34, B Wittmer 34, V Zhukov 34, M Ata 35, E Dietz-Laursonn 35, D Duchardt 35, M Erdmann 35, R Fischer 35, A Güth 35, T Hebbeker 35, C Heidemann 35, K Hoepfner 35, D Klingebiel 35, S Knutzen 35, P Kreuzer 35, M Merschmeyer 35, A Meyer 35, P Millet 35, M Olschewski 35, K Padeken 35, P Papacz 35, H Reithler 35, S A Schmitz 35, L Sonnenschein 35, D Teyssier 35, S Thüer 35, M Weber 35, V Cherepanov 36, Y Erdogan 36, G Flügge 36, H Geenen 36, M Geisler 36, W Haj Ahmad 36, A Heister 36, F Hoehle 36, B Kargoll 36, T Kress 36, Y Kuessel 36, J Lingemann 36, A Nowack 36, I M Nugent 36, L Perchalla 36, O Pooth 36, A Stahl 36, I Asin 37, N Bartosik 37, J Behr 37, W Behrenhoff 37, U Behrens 37, A J Bell 37, M Bergholz 37, A Bethani 37, K Borras 37, A Burgmeier 37, A Cakir 37, L Calligaris 37, A Campbell 37, S Choudhury 37, F Costanza 37, C Diez Pardos 37, S Dooling 37, T Dorland 37, G Eckerlin 37, D Eckstein 37, T Eichhorn 37, G Flucke 37, J Garay Garcia 37, A Geiser 37, P Gunnellini 37, J Hauk 37, G Hellwig 37, M Hempel 37, D Horton 37, H Jung 37, A Kalogeropoulos 37, M Kasemann 37, P Katsas 37, J Kieseler 37, C Kleinwort 37, D Krücker 37, W Lange 37, J Leonard 37, K Lipka 37, A Lobanov 37, W Lohmann 37, B Lutz 37, R Mankel 37, I Marfin 37, I-A Melzer-Pellmann 37, A B Meyer 37, J Mnich 37, A Mussgiller 37, S Naumann-Emme 37, A Nayak 37, O Novgorodova 37, F Nowak 37, E Ntomari 37, H Perrey 37, D Pitzl 37, R Placakyte 37, A Raspereza 37, P M Ribeiro Cipriano 37, E Ron 37, M Ö Sahin 37, J Salfeld-Nebgen 37, P Saxena 37, R Schmidt 37, T Schoerner-Sadenius 37, M Schröder 37, C Seitz 37, S Spannagel 37, A D R Vargas Trevino 37, R Walsh 37, C Wissing 37, M Aldaya Martin 38, V Blobel 38, M Centis Vignali 38, A r Draeger 38, J Erfle 38, E Garutti 38, K Goebel 38, M Görner 38, J Haller 38, M Hoffmann 38, R S Höing 38, H Kirschenmann 38, R Klanner 38, R Kogler 38, J Lange 38, T Lapsien 38, T Lenz 38, I Marchesini 38, J Ott 38, T Peiffer 38, N Pietsch 38, J Poehlsen 38, T Poehlsen 38, D Rathjens 38, C Sander 38, H Schettler 38, P Schleper 38, E Schlieckau 38, A Schmidt 38, M Seidel 38, V Sola 38, H Stadie 38, G Steinbrück 38, D Troendle 38, E Usai 38, L Vanelderen 38, C Barth 39, C Baus 39, J Berger 39, C Böser 39, E Butz 39, T Chwalek 39, W De Boer 39, A Descroix 39, A Dierlamm 39, M Feindt 39, F Frensch 39, M Giffels 39, F Hartmann 39, T Hauth 39, U Husemann 39, I Katkov 39, A Kornmayer 39, E Kuznetsova 39, P Lobelle Pardo 39, M U Mozer 39, Th Müller 39, A Nürnberg 39, G Quast 39, K Rabbertz 39, F Ratnikov 39, S Röcker 39, H J Simonis 39, F M Stober 39, R Ulrich 39, J Wagner-Kuhr 39, S Wayand 39, T Weiler 39, R Wolf 39, G Anagnostou 40, G Daskalakis 40, T Geralis 40, V A Giakoumopoulou 40, A Kyriakis 40, D Loukas 40, A Markou 40, C Markou 40, A Psallidas 40, I Topsis-Giotis 40, A Panagiotou 41, N Saoulidou 41, E Stiliaris 41, X Aslanoglou 42, I Evangelou 42, G Flouris 42, C Foudas 42, P Kokkas 42, N Manthos 42, I Papadopoulos 42, E Paradas 42, G Bencze 43, C Hajdu 43, P Hidas 43, D Horvath 43, F Sikler 43, V Veszpremi 43, G Vesztergombi 43, A J Zsigmond 43, N Beni 44, S Czellar 44, J Karancsi 44, J Molnar 44, J Palinkas 44, Z Szillasi 44, P Raics 45, Z L Trocsanyi 45, B Ujvari 45, S K Swain 46, S B Beri 47, V Bhatnagar 47, N Dhingra 47, R Gupta 47, U Bhawandeep 47, A K Kalsi 47, M Kaur 47, M Mittal 47, N Nishu 47, J B Singh 47, Ashok Kumar 48, Arun Kumar 48, S Ahuja 48, A Bhardwaj 48, B C Choudhary 48, A Kumar 48, S Malhotra 48, M Naimuddin 48, K Ranjan 48, V Sharma 48, S Banerjee 49, S Bhattacharya 49, K Chatterjee 49, S Dutta 49, B Gomber 49, Sa Jain 49, Sh Jain 49, R Khurana 49, A Modak 49, S Mukherjee 49, D Roy 49, S Sarkar 49, M Sharan 49, A Abdulsalam 50, D Dutta 50, S Kailas 50, V Kumar 50, A K Mohanty 50, L M Pant 50, P Shukla 50, A Topkar 50, T Aziz 51, S Banerjee 51, S Bhowmik 51, R M Chatterjee 51, R K Dewanjee 51, S Dugad 51, S Ganguly 51, S Ghosh 51, M Guchait 51, A Gurtu 51, G Kole 51, S Kumar 51, M Maity 51, G Majumder 51, K Mazumdar 51, G B Mohanty 51, B Parida 51, K Sudhakar 51, N Wickramage 51, H Bakhshiansohi 52, H Behnamian 52, S M Etesami 52, A Fahim 52, R Goldouzian 52, A Jafari 52, M Khakzad 52, M Mohammadi Najafabadi 52, M Naseri 52, S Paktinat Mehdiabadi 52, B Safarzadeh 52, M Zeinali 52, M Felcini 53, M Grunewald 53, M Abbrescia 54, L Barbone 54, C Calabria 54, S S Chhibra 54, A Colaleo 54, D Creanza 54, N De Filippis 54, M De Palma 54, L Fiore 54, G Iaselli 54, G Maggi 54, M Maggi 54, S My 54, S Nuzzo 54, A Pompili 54, G Pugliese 54, R Radogna 54, G Selvaggi 54, L Silvestris 54, G Singh 54, R Venditti 54, P Verwilligen 54, G Zito 54, G Abbiendi 55, A C Benvenuti 55, D Bonacorsi 55, S Braibant-Giacomelli 55, L Brigliadori 55, R Campanini 55, P Capiluppi 55, A Castro 55, F R Cavallo 55, G Codispoti 55, M Cuffiani 55, G M Dallavalle 55, F Fabbri 55, A Fanfani 55, D Fasanella 55, P Giacomelli 55, C Grandi 55, L Guiducci 55, S Marcellini 55, G Masetti 55, A Montanari 55, F L Navarria 55, A Perrotta 55, F Primavera 55, A M Rossi 55, T Rovelli 55, G P Siroli 55, N Tosi 55, R Travaglini 55, S Albergo 56, G Cappello 56, M Chiorboli 56, S Costa 56, F Giordano 56, R Potenza 56, A Tricomi 56, C Tuve 56, G Barbagli 57, V Ciulli 57, C Civinini 57, R D’Alessandro 57, E Focardi 57, E Gallo 57, S Gonzi 57, V Gori 57, P Lenzi 57, M Meschini 57, S Paoletti 57, G Sguazzoni 57, A Tropiano 57, L Benussi 58, S Bianco 58, F Fabbri 58, D Piccolo 58, F Ferro 59, M Lo Vetere 59, E Robutti 59, S Tosi 59, M E Dinardo 60, S Fiorendi 60, S Gennai 60, R Gerosa 60, A Ghezzi 60, P Govoni 60, M T Lucchini 60, S Malvezzi 60, R A Manzoni 60, A Martelli 60, B Marzocchi 60, D Menasce 60, L Moroni 60, M Paganoni 60, D Pedrini 60, S Ragazzi 60, N Redaelli 60, T Tabarelli de Fatis 60, S Buontempo 61, N Cavallo 61, S Di Guida 61, F Fabozzi 61, A O M Iorio 61, L Lista 61, S Meola 61, M Merola 61, P Paolucci 61, P Azzi 62, N Bacchetta 62, D Bisello 62, A Branca 62, R Carlin 62, P Checchia 62, M Dall’Osso 62, T Dorigo 62, U Dosselli 62, F Fanzago 62, M Galanti 62, F Gasparini 62, U Giubilato 62, A Gozzelino 62, K Kanishchev 62, S Lacaprara 62, M Margoni 62, A T Meneguzzo 62, F Montecassiano 62, J Pazzini 62, N Pozzobon 62, P Ronchese 62, F Simonetto 62, E Torassa 62, M Tosi 62, P Zotto 62, A Zucchetta 62, G Zumerle 62, M Gabusi 63, S P Ratti 63, C Riccardi 63, P Salvini 63, P Vitulo 63, M Biasini 64, G M Bilei 64, D Ciangottini 64, L Fanò 64, P Lariccia 64, G Mantovani 64, M Menichelli 64, F Romeo 64, A Saha 64, A Santocchia 64, A Spiezia 64, K Androsov 65, P Azzurri 65, G Bagliesi 65, J Bernardini 65, T Boccali 65, G Broccolo 65, R Castaldi 65, M A Ciocci 65, R Dell’Orso 65, S Donato 65, F Fiori 65, L Foà 65, A Giassi 65, M T Grippo 65, F Ligabue 65, T Lomtadze 65, L Martini 65, A Messineo 65, C S Moon 65, F Palla 65, A Rizzi 65, A Savoy-Navarro 65, A T Serban 65, P Spagnolo 65, P Squillacioti 65, R Tenchini 65, G Tonelli 65, A Venturi 65, P G Verdini 65, C Vernieri 65, L Barone 66, F Cavallari 66, G D’imperio 66, D Del Re 66, M Diemoz 66, M Grassi 66, C Jorda 66, E Longo 66, F Margaroli 66, P Meridiani 66, F Micheli 66, S Nourbakhsh 66, G Organtini 66, R Paramatti 66, S Rahatlou 66, C Rovelli 66, F Santanastasio 66, L Soffi 66, P Traczyk 66, N Amapane 67, R Arcidiacono 67, S Argiro 67, M Arneodo 67, R Bellan 67, C Biino 67, N Cartiglia 67, S Casasso 67, M Costa 67, A Degano 67, N Demaria 67, L Finco 67, C Mariotti 67, S Maselli 67, E Migliore 67, V Monaco 67, M Musich 67, M M Obertino 67, G Ortona 67, L Pacher 67, N Pastrone 67, M Pelliccioni 67, G L Pinna Angioni 67, A Potenza 67, A Romero 67, M Ruspa 67, R Sacchi 67, A Solano 67, A Staiano 67, U Tamponi 67, S Belforte 68, V Candelise 68, M Casarsa 68, F Cossutti 68, G Della Ricca 68, B Gobbo 68, C La Licata 68, M Marone 68, D Montanino 68, A Schizzi 68, T Umer 68, A Zanetti 68, T J Kim 69, S Chang 70, A Kropivnitskaya 70, S K Nam 70, D H Kim 71, G N Kim 71, M S Kim 71, M S Kim 71, D J Kong 71, S Lee 71, Y D Oh 71, H Park 71, A Sakharov 71, D C Son 71, J Y Kim 72, S Song 72, S Choi 73, D Gyun 73, B Hong 73, M Jo 73, H Kim 73, Y Kim 73, B Lee 73, K S Lee 73, S K Park 73, Y Roh 73, M Choi 74, J H Kim 74, I C Park 74, S Park 74, G Ryu 74, M S Ryu 74, Y Choi 75, Y K Choi 75, J Goh 75, D Kim 75, E Kwon 75, J Lee 75, H Seo 75, I Yu 75, A Juodagalvis 76, J R Komaragiri 77, M A B Md Ali 77, H Castilla-Valdez 78, E De La Cruz-Burelo 78, I Heredia-de La Cruz 78, R Lopez-Fernandez 78, A Sanchez-Hernandez 78, S Carrillo Moreno 79, F Vazquez Valencia 79, I Pedraza 80, H A Salazar Ibarguen 80, E Casimiro Linares 81, A Morelos Pineda 81, D Krofcheck 82, P H Butler 83, S Reucroft 83, A Ahmad 84, M Ahmad 84, Q Hassan 84, H R Hoorani 84, S Khalid 84, W A Khan 84, T Khurshid 84, M A Shah 84, M Shoaib 84, H Bialkowska 85, M Bluj 85, B Boimska 85, T Frueboes 85, M Górski 85, M Kazana 85, K Nawrocki 85, K Romanowska-Rybinska 85, M Szleper 85, P Zalewski 85, G Brona 86, K Bunkowski 86, M Cwiok 86, W Dominik 86, K Doroba 86, A Kalinowski 86, M Konecki 86, J Krolikowski 86, M Misiura 86, M Olszewski 86, W Wolszczak 86, P Bargassa 87, C Beirão Da Cruz E Silva 87, P Faccioli 87, P G Ferreira Parracho 87, M Gallinaro 87, F Nguyen 87, J Rodrigues Antunes 87, J Seixas 87, J Varela 87, P Vischia 87, I Golutvin 88, V Karjavin 88, V Konoplyanikov 88, V Korenkov 88, G Kozlov 88, A Lanev 88, A Malakhov 88, V Matveev 88, VV Mitsyn 88, P Moisenz 88, V Palichik 88, V Perelygin 88, S Shmatov 88, S Shulha 88, N Skatchkov 88, V Smirnov 88, E Tikhonenko 88, A Zarubin 88, V Golovtsov 89, Y Ivanov 89, V Kim 89, P Levchenko 89, V Murzin 89, V Oreshkin 89, I Smirnov 89, V Sulimov 89, L Uvarov 89, S Vavilov 89, A Vorobyev 89, An Vorobyev 89, Yu Andreev 90, A Dermenev 90, S Gninenko 90, N Golubev 90, M Kirsanov 90, N Krasnikov 90, A Pashenkov 90, D Tlisov 90, A Toropin 90, V Epshteyn 91, V Gavrilov 91, N Lychkovskaya 91, V Popov 91, G Safronov 91, S Semenov 91, A Spiridonov 91, V Stolin 91, E Vlasov 91, A Zhokin 91, V Andreev 92, M Azarkin 92, I Dremin 92, M Kirakosyan 92, A Leonidov 92, G Mesyats 92, S V Rusakov 92, A Vinogradov 92, A Belyaev 93, E Boos 93, V Bunichev 93, M Dubinin 93, L Dudko 93, A Ershov 93, A Gribushin 93, V Klyukhin 93, I Lokhtin 93, S Obraztsov 93, M Perfilov 93, V Savrin 93, A Snigirev 93, I Azhgirey 94, I Bayshev 94, S Bitioukov 94, V Kachanov 94, A Kalinin 94, D Konstantinov 94, V Krychkine 94, V Petrov 94, R Ryutin 94, A Sobol 94, L Tourtchanovitch 94, S Troshin 94, N Tyurin 94, A Uzunian 94, A Volkov 94, P Adzic 95, M Ekmedzic 95, J Milosevic 95, V Rekovic 95, J Alcaraz Maestre 96, C Battilana 96, E Calvo 96, M Cerrada 96, M Chamizo Llatas 96, N Colino 96, B De La Cruz 96, A Delgado Peris 96, D Domínguez Vázquez 96, A Escalante Del Valle 96, C Fernandez Bedoya 96, J P Fernández Ramos 96, J Flix 96, M C Fouz 96, P Garcia-Abia 96, O Gonzalez Lopez 96, S Goy Lopez 96, J M Hernandez 96, M I Josa 96, G Merino 96, E Navarro De Martino 96, A Pérez-Calero Yzquierdo 96, J Puerta Pelayo 96, A Quintario Olmeda 96, I Redondo 96, L Romero 96, M S Soares 96, C Albajar 97, J F de Trocóniz 97, M Missiroli 97, D Moran 97, H Brun 98, J Cuevas 98, J Fernandez Menendez 98, S Folgueras 98, I Gonzalez Caballero 98, L Lloret Iglesias 98, J A Brochero Cifuentes 99, I J Cabrillo 99, A Calderon 99, J Duarte Campderros 99, M Fernandez 99, G Gomez 99, A Graziano 99, A Lopez Virto 99, J Marco 99, R Marco 99, C Martinez Rivero 99, F Matorras 99, F J Munoz Sanchez 99, J Piedra Gomez 99, T Rodrigo 99, A Y Rodríguez-Marrero 99, A Ruiz-Jimeno 99, L Scodellaro 99, I Vila 99, R Vilar Cortabitarte 99, D Abbaneo 100, E Auffray 100, G Auzinger 100, M Bachtis 100, P Baillon 100, A H Ball 100, D Barney 100, A Benaglia 100, J Bendavid 100, L Benhabib 100, J F Benitez 100, C Bernet 100, G Bianchi 100, P Bloch 100, A Bocci 100, A Bonato 100, O Bondu 100, C Botta 100, H Breuker 100, T Camporesi 100, G Cerminara 100, S Colafranceschi 100, M D’Alfonso 100, D d’Enterria 100, A Dabrowski 100, A David 100, F De Guio 100, A De Roeck 100, S De Visscher 100, M Dobson 100, M Dordevic 100, N Dupont-Sagorin 100, A Elliott-Peisert 100, J Eugster 100, G Franzoni 100, W Funk 100, D Gigi 100, K Gill 100, D Giordano 100, M Girone 100, F Glege 100, R Guida 100, S Gundacker 100, M Guthoff 100, R Guida 100, J Hammer 100, M Hansen 100, P Harris 100, J Hegeman 100, V Innocente 100, P Janot 100, K Kousouris 100, K Krajczar 100, P Lecoq 100, C Lourenço 100, N Magini 100, L Malgeri 100, M Mannelli 100, J Marrouche 100, L Masetti 100, F Meijers 100, S Mersi 100, E Meschi 100, F Moortgat 100, S Morovic 100, M Mulders 100, P Musella 100, L Orsini 100, L Pape 100, E Perez 100, L Perrozzi 100, A Petrilli 100, G Petrucciani 100, A Pfeiffer 100, M Pierini 100, M Pimiä 100, D Piparo 100, M Plagge 100, A Racz 100, G Rolandi 100, M Rovere 100, H Sakulin 100, C Schäfer 100, C Schwick 100, A Sharma 100, P Siegrist 100, P Silva 100, M Simon 100, P Sphicas 100, D Spiga 100, J Steggemann 100, B Stieger 100, M Stoye 100, D Treille 100, A Tsirou 100, G I Veres 100, J R Vlimant 100, N Wardle 100, H K Wöhri 100, H Wollny 100, W D Zeuner 100, W Bertl 101, K Deiters 101, W Erdmann 101, R Horisberger 101, Q Ingram 101, H C Kaestli 101, D Kotlinski 101, U Langenegger 101, D Renker 101, T Rohe 101, F Bachmair 102, L Bäni 102, L Bianchini 102, P Bortignon 102, M A Buchmann 102, B Casal 102, N Chanon 102, A Deisher 102, G Dissertori 102, M Dittmar 102, M Donegà 102, M Dünser 102, P Eller 102, C Grab 102, D Hits 102, W Lustermann 102, B Mangano 102, A C Marini 102, P Martinez Ruiz del Arbol 102, D Meister 102, N Mohr 102, C Nägeli 102, F Nessi-Tedaldi 102, F Pandolfi 102, F Pauss 102, M Peruzzi 102, M Quittnat 102, L Rebane 102, M Rossini 102, A Starodumov 102, M Takahashi 102, K Theofilatos 102, R Wallny 102, H A Weber 102, C Amsler 103, M F Canelli 103, V Chiochia 103, A De Cosa 103, A Hinzmann 103, T Hreus 103, B Kilminster 103, C Lange 103, B Millan Mejias 103, J Ngadiuba 103, P Robmann 103, F J Ronga 103, S Taroni 103, M Verzetti 103, Y Yang 103, M Cardaci 104, K H Chen 104, C Ferro 104, C M Kuo 104, W Lin 104, Y J Lu 104, R Volpe 104, S S Yu 104, P Chang 105, Y H Chang 105, Y W Chang 105, Y Chao 105, K F Chen 105, P H Chen 105, C Dietz 105, U Grundler 105, W-S Hou 105, K Y Kao 105, Y J Lei 105, Y F Liu 105, R-S Lu 105, D Majumder 105, E Petrakou 105, Y M Tzeng 105, R Wilken 105, B Asavapibhop 106, N Srimanobhas 106, N Suwonjandee 106, A Adiguzel 107, M N Bakirci 107, S Cerci 107, C Dozen 107, I Dumanoglu 107, E Eskut 107, S Girgis 107, G Gokbulut 107, E Gurpinar 107, I Hos 107, E E Kangal 107, A Kayis Topaksu 107, G Onengut 107, K Ozdemir 107, S Ozturk 107, A Polatoz 107, K Sogut 107, D Sunar Cerci 107, B Tali 107, H Topakli 107, M Vergili 107, I V Akin 108, B Bilin 108, S Bilmis 108, H Gamsizkan 108, G Karapinar 108, K Ocalan 108, S Sekmen 108, U E Surat 108, M Yalvac 108, M Zeyrek 108, E Gülmez 109, B Isildak 109, M Kaya 109, O Kaya 109, H Bahtiyar 110, E Barlas 110, K Cankocak 110, F I Vardarlı 110, M Yücel 110, L Levchuk 111, P Sorokin 111, J J Brooke 112, E Clement 112, D Cussans 112, H Flacher 112, R Frazier 112, J Goldstein 112, M Grimes 112, G P Heath 112, H F Heath 112, J Jacob 112, L Kreczko 112, C Lucas 112, Z Meng 112, D M Newbold 112, S Paramesvaran 112, A Poll 112, S Senkin 112, V J Smith 112, T Williams 112, K W Bell 113, A Belyaev 113, C Brew 113, R M Brown 113, D J A Cockerill 113, J A Coughlan 113, K Harder 113, S Harper 113, E Olaiya 113, D Petyt 113, C H Shepherd-Themistocleous 113, A Thea 113, I R Tomalin 113, W J Womersley 113, S D Worm 113, M Baber 114, R Bainbridge 114, O Buchmuller 114, D Burton 114, D Colling 114, N Cripps 114, M Cutajar 114, P Dauncey 114, G Davies 114, M Della Negra 114, P Dunne 114, W Ferguson 114, J Fulcher 114, D Futyan 114, A Gilbert 114, G Hall 114, G Iles 114, M Jarvis 114, G Karapostoli 114, M Kenzie 114, R Lane 114, R Lucas 114, L Lyons 114, A-M Magnan 114, S Malik 114, B Mathias 114, J Nash 114, A Nikitenko 114, J Pela 114, M Pesaresi 114, K Petridis 114, D M Raymond 114, S Rogerson 114, A Rose 114, C Seez 114, P Sharp 114, A Tapper 114, M Vazquez Acosta 114, T Virdee 114, J E Cole 115, P R Hobson 115, A Khan 115, P Kyberd 115, D Leggat 115, D Leslie 115, W Martin 115, I D Reid 115, P Symonds 115, L Teodorescu 115, M Turner 115, J Dittmann 116, K Hatakeyama 116, A Kasmi 116, H Liu 116, T Scarborough 116, O Charaf 117, S I Cooper 117, C Henderson 117, P Rumerio 117, A Avetisyan 118, T Bose 118, C Fantasia 118, P Lawson 118, C Richardson 118, J Rohlf 118, D Sperka 118, J St John 118, L Sulak 118, J Alimena 119, E Berry 119, S Bhattacharya 119, G Christopher 119, D Cutts 119, Z Demiragli 119, A Ferapontov 119, A Garabedian 119, U Heintz 119, G Kukartsev 119, E Laird 119, G Landsberg 119, M Luk 119, M Narain 119, M Segala 119, T Sinthuprasith 119, T Speer 119, J Swanson 119, R Breedon 120, G Breto 120, M Calderon De La Barca Sanchez 120, S Chauhan 120, M Chertok 120, J Conway 120, R Conway 120, P T Cox 120, R Erbacher 120, M Gardner 120, W Ko 120, R Lander 120, T Miceli 120, M Mulhearn 120, D Pellett 120, J Pilot 120, F Ricci-Tam 120, M Searle 120, S Shalhout 120, J Smith 120, M Squires 120, D Stolp 120, M Tripathi 120, S Wilbur 120, R Yohay 120, R Cousins 121, P Everaerts 121, C Farrell 121, J Hauser 121, M Ignatenko 121, G Rakness 121, E Takasugi 121, V Valuev 121, M Weber 121, J Babb 122, K Burt 122, R Clare 122, J Ellison 122, J W Gary 122, G Hanson 122, J Heilman 122, M Ivova Rikova 122, P Jandir 122, E Kennedy 122, F Lacroix 122, H Liu 122, O R Long 122, A Luthra 122, M Malberti 122, H Nguyen 122, M Olmedo Negrete 122, A Shrinivas 122, S Sumowidagdo 122, S Wimpenny 122, W Andrews 123, J G Branson 123, G B Cerati 123, S Cittolin 123, R T D’Agnolo 123, D Evans 123, A Holzner 123, R Kelley 123, D Klein 123, M Lebourgeois 123, J Letts 123, I Macneill 123, D Olivito 123, S Padhi 123, C Palmer 123, M Pieri 123, M Sani 123, V Sharma 123, S Simon 123, E Sudano 123, M Tadel 123, Y Tu 123, A Vartak 123, C Welke 123, F Würthwein 123, A Yagil 123, J Yoo 123, D Barge 124, J Bradmiller-Feld 124, C Campagnari 124, T Danielson 124, A Dishaw 124, K Flowers 124, M Franco Sevilla 124, P Geffert 124, C George 124, F Golf 124, L Gouskos 124, J Incandela 124, C Justus 124, N Mccoll 124, J Richman 124, D Stuart 124, W To 124, C West 124, A Apresyan 125, A Bornheim 125, J Bunn 125, Y Chen 125, E Di Marco 125, J Duarte 125, A Mott 125, H B Newman 125, C Pena 125, C Rogan 125, M Spiropulu 125, V Timciuc 125, R Wilkinson 125, S Xie 125, R Y Zhu 125, V Azzolini 126, A Calamba 126, B Carlson 126, T Ferguson 126, Y Iiyama 126, M Paulini 126, J Russ 126, H Vogel 126, I Vorobiev 126, J P Cumalat 127, W T Ford 127, A Gaz 127, E Luiggi Lopez 127, U Nauenberg 127, J G Smith 127, K Stenson 127, K A Ulmer 127, S R Wagner 127, J Alexander 128, A Chatterjee 128, J Chu 128, S Dittmer 128, N Eggert 128, N Mirman 128, G Nicolas Kaufman 128, J R Patterson 128, A Ryd 128, E Salvati 128, L Skinnari 128, W Sun 128, W D Teo 128, J Thom 128, J Thompson 128, J Tucker 128, Y Weng 128, L Winstrom 128, P Wittich 128, D Winn 129, S Abdullin 130, M Albrow 130, J Anderson 130, G Apollinari 130, L A T Bauerdick 130, A Beretvas 130, J Berryhill 130, P C Bhat 130, K Burkett 130, J N Butler 130, H W K Cheung 130, F Chlebana 130, S Cihangir 130, V D Elvira 130, I Fisk 130, J Freeman 130, Y Gao 130, E Gottschalk 130, L Gray 130, D Green 130, S Grünendahl 130, O Gutsche 130, J Hanlon 130, D Hare 130, R M Harris 130, J Hirschauer 130, B Hooberman 130, S Jindariani 130, M Johnson 130, U Joshi 130, K Kaadze 130, B Klima 130, B Kreis 130, S Kwan 130, J Linacre 130, D Lincoln 130, R Lipton 130, T Liu 130, J Lykken 130, K Maeshima 130, J M Marraffino 130, V I Martinez Outschoorn 130, S Maruyama 130, D Mason 130, P McBride 130, K Mishra 130, S Mrenna 130, Y Musienko 130, S Nahn 130, C Newman-Holmes 130, V O’Dell 130, O Prokofyev 130, E Sexton-Kennedy 130, S Sharma 130, A Soha 130, W J Spalding 130, L Spiegel 130, L Taylor 130, S Tkaczyk 130, N V Tran 130, L Uplegger 130, E W Vaandering 130, R Vidal 130, A Whitbeck 130, J Whitmore 130, F Yang 130, D Acosta 131, P Avery 131, D Bourilkov 131, M Carver 131, T Cheng 131, D Curry 131, S Das 131, M De Gruttola 131, G P Di Giovanni 131, R D Field 131, M Fisher 131, I K Furic 131, J Hugon 131, J Konigsberg 131, A Korytov 131, T Kypreos 131, J F Low 131, K Matchev 131, P Milenovic 131, G Mitselmakher 131, L Muniz 131, A Rinkevicius 131, L Shchutska 131, M Snowball 131, J Yelton 131, M Zakaria 131, S Hewamanage 132, S Linn 132, P Markowitz 132, G Martinez 132, J L Rodriguez 132, T Adams 133, A Askew 133, J Bochenek 133, B Diamond 133, J Haas 133, S Hagopian 133, V Hagopian 133, K F Johnson 133, H Prosper 133, V Veeraraghavan 133, M Weinberg 133, M M Baarmand 134, M Hohlmann 134, H Kalakhety 134, F Yumiceva 134, M R Adams 135, L Apanasevich 135, V E Bazterra 135, D Berry 135, R R Betts 135, I Bucinskaite 135, R Cavanaugh 135, O Evdokimov 135, L Gauthier 135, C E Gerber 135, D J Hofman 135, S Khalatyan 135, P Kurt 135, D H Moon 135, C O’Brien 135, C Silkworth 135, P Turner 135, N Varelas 135, E A Albayrak 136, B Bilki 136, W Clarida 136, K Dilsiz 136, F Duru 136, M Haytmyradov 136, J-P Merlo 136, H Mermerkaya 136, A Mestvirishvili 136, A Moeller 136, J Nachtman 136, H Ogul 136, Y Onel 136, F Ozok 136, A Penzo 136, R Rahmat 136, S Sen 136, P Tan 136, E Tiras 136, J Wetzel 136, T Yetkin 136, K Yi 136, B A Barnett 137, B Blumenfeld 137, S Bolognesi 137, D Fehling 137, A V Gritsan 137, P Maksimovic 137, C Martin 137, M Swartz 137, P Baringer 138, A Bean 138, G Benelli 138, C Bruner 138, J Gray 138, R P Kenny III 138, M Malek 138, M Murray 138, D Noonan 138, S Sanders 138, J Sekaric 138, R Stringer 138, Q Wang 138, J S Wood 138, A F Barfuss 139, I Chakaberia 139, A Ivanov 139, S Khalil 139, M Makouski 139, Y Maravin 139, L K Saini 139, S Shrestha 139, N Skhirtladze 139, I Svintradze 139, J Gronberg 140, D Lange 140, F Rebassoo 140, D Wright 140, A Baden 141, A Belloni 141, B Calvert 141, S C Eno 141, J A Gomez 141, N J Hadley 141, R G Kellogg 141, T Kolberg 141, Y Lu 141, M Marionneau 141, A C Mignerey 141, K Pedro 141, A Skuja 141, M B Tonjes 141, S C Tonwar 141, A Apyan 142, R Barbieri 142, G Bauer 142, W Busza 142, I A Cali 142, M Chan 142, L Di Matteo 142, V Dutta 142, G Gomez Ceballos 142, M Goncharov 142, D Gulhan 142, M Klute 142, Y S Lai 142, Y-J Lee 142, A Levin 142, P D Luckey 142, T Ma 142, C Paus 142, D Ralph 142, C Roland 142, G Roland 142, G S F Stephans 142, F Stöckli 142, K Sumorok 142, D Velicanu 142, J Veverka 142, B Wyslouch 142, M Yang 142, A S Yoon 142, M Zanetti 142, V Zhukova 142, B Dahmes 143, A De Benedetti 143, A Gude 143, S C Kao 143, K Klapoetke 143, Y Kubota 143, J Mans 143, N Pastika 143, R Rusack 143, A Singovsky 143, N Tambe 143, J Turkewitz 143, J G Acosta 144, L M Cremaldi 144, R Kroeger 144, S Oliveros 144, L Perera 144, D A Sanders 144, D Summers 144, E Avdeeva 145, K Bloom 145, S Bose 145, D R Claes 145, A Dominguez 145, R Gonzalez Suarez 145, J Keller 145, D Knowlton 145, I Kravchenko 145, J Lazo-Flores 145, S Malik 145, F Meier 145, G R Snow 145, J Dolen 146, A Godshalk 146, I Iashvili 146, S Jain 146, A Kharchilava 146, A Kumar 146, S Rappoccio 146, G Alverson 147, E Barberis 147, D Baumgartel 147, M Chasco 147, J Haley 147, A Massironi 147, D Nash 147, T Orimoto 147, D Trocino 147, D Wood 147, J Zhang 147, A Anastassov 148, K A Hahn 148, A Kubik 148, L Lusito 148, N Mucia 148, N Odell 148, B Pollack 148, A Pozdnyakov 148, M Schmitt 148, S Stoynev 148, K Sung 148, M Velasco 148, S Won 148, A Brinkerhoff 149, K M Chan 149, A Drozdetskiy 149, M Hildreth 149, C Jessop 149, D J Karmgard 149, N Kellams 149, K Lannon 149, W Luo 149, S Lynch 149, N Marinelli 149, T Pearson 149, M Planer 149, R Ruchti 149, N Valls 149, M Wayne 149, M Wolf 149, A Woodard 149, L Antonelli 150, J Brinson 150, B Bylsma 150, L S Durkin 150, S Flowers 150, C Hill 150, R Hughes 150, K Kotov 150, T Y Ling 150, D Puigh 150, M Rodenburg 150, G Smith 150, B L Winer 150, H Wolfe 150, H W Wulsin 150, O Driga 151, P Elmer 151, P Hebda 151, A Hunt 151, S A Koay 151, P Lujan 151, D Marlow 151, T Medvedeva 151, M Mooney 151, J Olsen 151, P Piroué 151, X Quan 151, H Saka 151, D Stickland 151, C Tully 151, J S Werner 151, S C Zenz 151, A Zuranski 151, E Brownson 152, H Mendez 152, J E Ramirez Vargas 152, E Alagoz 153, V E Barnes 153, D Benedetti 153, G Bolla 153, D Bortoletto 153, M De Mattia 153, Z Hu 153, M K Jha 153, M Jones 153, K Jung 153, M Kress 153, N Leonardo 153, D Lopes Pegna 153, V Maroussov 153, P Merkel 153, D H Miller 153, N Neumeister 153, B C Radburn-Smith 153, X Shi 153, I Shipsey 153, D Silvers 153, A Svyatkovskiy 153, F Wang 153, W Xie 153, L Xu 153, H D Yoo 153, J Zablocki 153, Y Zheng 153, N Parashar 154, J Stupak 154, A Adair 155, B Akgun 155, K M Ecklund 155, F J M Geurts 155, W Li 155, B Michlin 155, B P Padley 155, R Redjimi 155, J Roberts 155, J Zabel 155, B Betchart 156, A Bodek 156, R Covarelli 156, P de Barbaro 156, R Demina 156, Y Eshaq 156, T Ferbel 156, A Garcia-Bellido 156, P Goldenzweig 156, J Han 156, A Harel 156, A Khukhunaishvili 156, G Petrillo 156, D Vishnevskiy 156, R Ciesielski 157, L Demortier 157, K Goulianos 157, G Lungu 157, C Mesropian 157, S Arora 158, A Barker 158, J P Chou 158, C Contreras-Campana 158, E Contreras-Campana 158, D Duggan 158, D Ferencek 158, Y Gershtein 158, R Gray 158, E Halkiadakis 158, D Hidas 158, A Lath 158, S Panwalkar 158, M Park 158, R Patel 158, S Salur 158, S Schnetzer 158, S Somalwar 158, R Stone 158, S Thomas 158, P Thomassen 158, M Walker 158, K Rose 159, S Spanier 159, A York 159, O Bouhali 160, R Eusebi 160, W Flanagan 160, J Gilmore 160, T Kamon 160, V Khotilovich 160, V Krutelyov 160, R Montalvo 160, I Osipenkov 160, Y Pakhotin 160, A Perloff 160, J Roe 160, A Rose 160, A Safonov 160, T Sakuma 160, I Suarez 160, A Tatarinov 160, N Akchurin 161, C Cowden 161, J Damgov 161, C Dragoiu 161, P R Dudero 161, J Faulkner 161, K Kovitanggoon 161, S Kunori 161, S W Lee 161, T Libeiro 161, I Volobouev 161, E Appelt 162, A G Delannoy 162, S Greene 162, A Gurrola 162, W Johns 162, C Maguire 162, Y Mao 162, A Melo 162, M Sharma 162, P Sheldon 162, B Snook 162, S Tuo 162, J Velkovska 162, M W Arenton 163, S Boutle 163, B Cox 163, B Francis 163, J Goodell 163, R Hirosky 163, A Ledovskoy 163, H Li 163, C Lin 163, C Neu 163, J Wood 163, C Clarke 164, R Harr 164, P E Karchin 164, C Kottachchi Kankanamge Don 164, P Lamichhane 164, J Sturdy 164, D A Belknap 165, D Carlsmith 165, M Cepeda 165, S Dasu 165, L Dodd 165, S Duric 165, E Friis 165, R Hall-Wilton 165, M Herndon 165, A Hervé 165, P Klabbers 165, A Lanaro 165, C Lazaridis 165, A Levine 165, R Loveless 165, A Mohapatra 165, I Ojalvo 165, T Perry 165, G A Pierro 165, G Polese 165, I Ross 165, T Sarangi 165, A Savin 165, W H Smith 165, C Vuosalo 165, N Woods 165, [Authorinst]The CMS Collaboration 166,
PMCID: PMC4370853  PMID: 25814914

Abstract

A measurement of the cross section for the production of top quark–antiquark pairs (tt¯) in association with a vector boson V (W or Z) in proton-proton collisions at s=8 TeV is presented. The results are based on a dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 19.5 fb-1 recorded with the CMS detector at the LHC. The measurement is performed in three leptonic (e and μ) channels: a same-sign dilepton analysis targeting tt¯W events, and trilepton and four-lepton analyses designed for tt¯Z events. In the same-sign dilepton channel, the tt¯W cross section is measured as σtt¯W=170-80+90(stat)±70(syst)fb, corresponding to a significance of 1.6 standard deviations over the background-only hypothesis. Combining the trilepton and four-lepton channels, a direct measurement of the tt¯Z cross section, σtt¯Z=200-70+80(stat)-30+40(syst)fb-1, is obtained with a significance of 3.1 standard deviations. The measured cross sections are compatible with standard model predictions within their experimental uncertainties. The inclusive tt¯V process is observed with a significance of 3.7 standard deviations from the combination of all three leptonic channels.

Introduction

Two decades after the discovery of the top quark [1, 2], many of its properties are still to be determined or are only loosely constrained by experimental data. Among these properties are the couplings between the top quark and the vector bosons.

The existence of non-zero couplings between the top quark and the neutral vector bosons can be inferred through the analysis of direct production of tt¯ pairs in association with a γ or a Z boson. The CERN LHC allows these two processes to be disentangled and the corresponding couplings to be measured. The associated production of tt¯ pairs with a W boson, the tt¯W process, has a cross section similar to tt¯Z and tt¯γ production. All three processes can be used to test the internal consistency of the standard model (SM) [35] and search for the presence of new physics. Despite their small cross sections, they are significant backgrounds to analyses that probe phenomena with even smaller, or comparable, cross sections. Examples are searches for supersymmetry [68] in same-sign dilepton [9] and in multilepton [10] final states, and the analysis of the SM tt¯H process with the Higgs boson and the top quarks decaying leptonically.

The measurement of the tt¯γ process has been documented by the CDF Collaboration [11] for proton-antiproton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy s=1.96TeV. This article presents instead the measurement of cross sections for the tt¯W and tt¯Z processes in proton-proton (pp) collisions at s=8TeV. The analysis is based on data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 19.5fb-1 collected with the CMS detector at the LHC in 2012. Unlike the previous observation of the tt¯V process (V equal to W or Z) at s=7TeV [12], here the tt¯W process is treated separately.

Three leptonic (e and μ) final states are considered: same-sign dilepton events, trilepton events, and four-lepton events. The same-sign dilepton events are used for the measurement of the tt¯W process, where one lepton originates from the leptonic decay of one of the two top quarks and the other like-sign lepton is produced in the decay of the prompt vector boson. The trilepton events are used for the identification of tt¯Z events in which one lepton is again produced from the leptonic decay of one of the two top quarks, and the two other opposite-sign and same-flavour leptons stem from the decay of the Z boson. The four-lepton events are used to identify tt¯Z events in which both the top quarks and the Z boson decay leptonically. For all three signatures, signal events containing leptonic τ decays are implicitly included.

Figure 1 shows the most important leading-order Feynman diagrams for tt¯W and tt¯Z production in pp collisions. For pp collisions at s=8TeV, the current best estimates of the cross sections for these processes are based on quantum chromodynamics (QCD) calculations at next-to-leading-order (NLO) in αs. Using CT10 NLO [13] parton distribution functions (PDF) and a top-quark mass of 173GeV, the software framework MadGraph 5_amc@nlo  [14, 15] provides a cross section of 206-23+21fb for tt¯W production and of 197-25+22fb for tt¯Z production, in agreement with independent NLO calculations [16, 17].

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

The dominant leading-order Feynman diagrams for tt¯W and tt¯Z production in pp collisions. The charge conjugate of the diagrams shown is implied

As the number of selected signal events is expected to be comparable to that of the background processes, the estimation of the background is a key aspect of the analysis. The strategy is to use background-dominated control samples in data to the maximum extent possible. Many contributions to the background, in particular those caused by detector misreconstruction, are estimated in this way, while the remaining irreducible backgrounds are estimated using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations and the most precise calculations of cross sections that are available. For the three separate channels and also for their combination, the yields of events found in excess of the expected backgrounds are used to measure the corresponding signal cross sections.

The CMS detector

The central feature of the CMS apparatus is a superconducting solenoid of 6\,m internal diameter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8\,T. Within the superconducting solenoid volume are a silicon pixel and strip tracker, a lead tungstate crystal electromagnetic calorimeter, and a brass/scintillator hadron calorimeter. Muons are measured in gas-ionization detectors embedded in the steel flux-return yoke outside the solenoid. A forward calorimeter extends the coverage provided by the barrel and endcap detectors. CMS uses a right-handed coordinate system, with the origin at the nominal interaction point, the x axis pointing to the centre of the LHC, the y axis pointing up (perpendicular to the LHC plane), and the z axis along the anticlockwise-beam direction. The polar angle θ is measured from the positive z axis and the azimuthal angle ϕ is measured in the x-y plane in radians. Events are selected by a two-stage trigger system: a hardware-based trigger followed by a software-based high-level trigger running on the data acquisition computer farm. A more detailed description of the CMS apparatus can be found in Ref. [18].

Event selection and Monte Carlo simulation

For all the channels considered in this analysis, the data are selected online by dilepton (ee, eμ, and μμ) triggers that demand a transverse momentum (pT) larger than 17GeV for the highest pT lepton and 8GeV for the second-highest. The online selection involves loose identification for both flavours and isolation requirements on electrons. Other channel-specific triggers, which are described in detail later, select control regions that are used for the estimation of specific backgrounds and the assessment of the signal selection efficiency. After the online selection, data and simulated events are reconstructed offline using the same software.

Each event is processed using a global event reconstruction approach  [19, 20]. This consists in reconstructing and identifying particles using an optimized combination of the information from all subdetectors. In this process, the identification of the particle type (photon, electron, muon, charged hadron, and neutral hadron) plays an important role in the determination of the particle direction and energy.

The tracks reconstructed in the silicon tracker are clustered in several primary vertices corresponding to the different pp interactions occurring within the same LHC bunch crossing. The vertex that has the largest ipTi2, where i runs over all tracks of the vertex, is assumed to identify the signal primary vertex. Its position is used to discriminate against particles originating from the other interactions (pileup) and to distinguish between prompt and non-prompt particles stemming from the signal interaction.

For each event, hadronic jets are clustered from the reconstructed particles using the anti-kT algorithm [21], operated with a distance parameter of 0.5. The jet momentum is determined as the vector sum of all particle momenta in the jet. In this analysis the jets used for the definition of the signal regions (signal jets) are required to be inside the tracker acceptance, i.e. |η|<2.4 where η-ln[tan(θ/2)], to reduce the uncertainty in the jet reconstruction efficiency and improve the precision of the energy measurement. Jet energy corrections are applied to account for the non-linear response of the calorimeters and other instrumental effects. These corrections are based on in situ measurements using dijet and γ+jet data samples [22]. A two-fold approach is employed to reduce the effect of pileup during jet reconstruction. Firstly, charged particles whose trajectories point to pileup vertices are excluded from the set of particles that are used for the reconstruction of signal jets. Secondly, the average energy density due to neutral pileup particles is evaluated in each event, and the corresponding energy inside the jet is subtracted [23]. Then a jet identification requirement [24], primarily based on the energy balance between charged and neutral hadrons in a jet, is applied to remove jets that are misreconstructed or originate from instrumental noise. Finally, the trajectories of all the charged particles of a jet are used to calculate a pT-averaged longitudinal impact parameter for each signal jet [25]. This variable is then employed as a discriminator against jets from pileup. Unless otherwise specified, signal jets are required to have pT>30 GeV.

To identify (tag) jets originating from the hadronization of bottom quarks (b jets), the combined secondary vertex (CSV) algorithm [26] is used. The algorithm combines the information about track impact parameters and secondary vertices within jets in a likelihood discriminant to provide separation between b jets and jets originating from light quarks, gluons, or charm quarks. We use here two operating points. The loose working point corresponds to a b-tagging efficiency for jets originating from b quarks of about 85 % and a misidentification probability for jets from light quarks and gluons of 10 %. The medium working point provides an efficiency of about 70 % and a misidentification probability of 1.5 %.

Muons and electrons are identified using standard quality criteria [27, 28] and are required to have pT>20 GeV and |η|<2.4. For the four-lepton channel only, identified leptons with pT between 10 and 20GeV are also employed for the event selection. To reduce the contamination caused by leptons from heavy-flavour decays or misidentified hadrons in jets, leptons are required to be isolated and to pass a selection on the impact parameter, which is calculated with respect to the position of the signal primary vertex. Candidates are considered isolated when the ratio of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all the other reconstructed particles in a cone of ΔR=(Δη)2+(Δϕ)2=0.3 around the candidate, relative to the lepton pT value, is less than 5–10 %, the exact value of the threshold depending on the flavour of the lepton and on the final state. This relative isolation is corrected for the expected contribution from pileup using an approach that is similar to the one employed for the reconstruction of jets [29]. The leptons are required to originate from the primary interaction demanding that their transverse and longitudinal impact parameters are smaller than 50–200μm and 0.1–1.0cm, respectively. The tightest selections in these ranges are used for the lepton flavour and final states that are most affected by backgrounds due to non-prompt leptons.

Finally, the observables ETmiss and HT are used, respectively, to identify the presence of neutrinos and to measure the hadronic activity in the analysed events. The former is defined as the magnitude of the vector sum of the transverse momenta of all reconstructed particles, the latter is the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all signal jets.

Simulations, which include pileup effects, are used to estimate some of the backgrounds, as well as to calculate the selection efficiency for the tt¯W and tt¯Z signal events. Simulated samples are generated with the MadGraph 5 [30] program, with the exception of the tt¯H background process that is generated using pythia  6 [31]. All simulated samples are processed using a Geant4-based model [32] of the CMS detector. Signal samples are produced with MadGraph 5, which is used with the CTEQ6L1 [33] PDF and is interfaced to pythia  6.424 to simulate parton showering and hadronization.

Same-sign dilepton analysis

The aim of the same-sign dilepton analysis is to search for tt¯W events where one lepton is produced in the leptonic decay chain of one of the two top quarks, and the other like-sign lepton stems directly from the decay of the prompt vector boson:

pptt¯W(tbν)(tbqq¯)(Wν),

where corresponds to an electron or a muon. By requiring that the two selected leptons have the same sign, only half of the signal produced in the dilepton final state can be selected. However, the requirement significantly improves the signal-over-background ratio. The main background is caused by misidentification and misreconstruction effects: decay products of heavy-flavour mesons that give rise to non-prompt leptons and pions in jets misidentified as prompt leptons. A second, smaller, source of background is also caused by misreconstruction and consists of opposite-sign dilepton events where the charge of one of the two leptons is wrongly assigned.

The selection for the dilepton channel is conducted through the following steps:

  1. Each event must contain two isolated leptons of the same charge and pT>40GeV. Both leptons are required to be compatible with the signal primary vertex and have a relative isolation smaller than 5%. The invariant mass of the dilepton pair is required to be larger than 8GeV.

  2. Three or more signal jets must be reconstructed, and at least one of these has to be b-tagged using the medium working point of the CSV algorithm.

  3. Events are rejected if they contain a third lepton forming, with one of the other two leptons, a same-flavour opposite-sign pair whose invariant mass is within 15GeV of the known Z-boson mass [34]. For the third lepton, the relative isolation must be less than 9(10) % if it is an electron (muon), and the transverse momentum requirement is loosened to pT>10 GeV.

  4. The HT value is required to be greater than 155GeV.

  5. Selected events are grouped in three categories depending on the lepton flavour: ee, eμ, and μμ dilepton pairs. Each of these categories is further split into two separate sets of dileptons with either positive or negative charges, for a total of six signal regions.

The tight-lepton selection (1) reduces the background from misidentified leptons, while the invariant mass requirement rejects events with pairs of energetic leptons from decays of heavy hadrons. The requirement (2) on the general number of jets and on the number of b-tagged jets present in the event decreases the background from electroweak processes, e.g. WZ production, that can have same-sign leptons in the final state, but are accompanied by little hadronic activity. The WZ background is also significantly reduced by the third-lepton veto (3). The HT requirement (4) as well as the threshold on the lepton pT (1) have been optimized for the best signal significance. This selection also minimizes the expected uncertainty in the measured cross section. The splitting (5) of the signal candidates in six categories is done for two reasons: exploiting the smaller background from lepton and charge misidentification in signal regions with muons and benefitting from the greater signal cross section in the plus-plus dilepton final states, which is caused by the abundance of quarks, instead of antiquarks, within the colliding protons at the LHC. Finally, the Z-boson veto is necessary to make the dilepton analysis statistically independent from the trilepton one described later. Events with three leptons are not rejected if they pass the Z-boson veto, since these can stem from a fully-leptonic decay of the tt¯ pair in tt¯W signal events.

Background estimation

After the full same-sign dilepton selection is applied, there are three general categories of background processes that are selected together with tt¯W signal events: background from non-prompt or misidentified leptons (misidentified lepton background); background from lepton charge misidentification (mismeasured charge background); WZ and tt¯Z production, as well as other rare SM processes that contain genuine pairs of prompt, isolated and same-sign leptons. The subset of these processes that do not contain a Z boson in the final state forms the irreducible component of the background. This includes the production of like-sign WW and the production of the Higgs boson in association with a pair of top quarks. The production of a tt¯ pair in association with a W boson by means of double parton scattering is expected to have a cross section two orders of magnitude smaller than the tt¯W production through single scattering [35]. This source of background is therefore considered negligible and is ignored in the rest of the analysis.

The first background consists mostly of tt¯ events, with a second important contribution coming from W+jets events. In both cases, one prompt lepton originates from the leptonic decay of a W boson, and another same-sign lepton is caused by the misidentification of a non-prompt lepton stemming from the decay of a heavy-flavour hadron. In W+jets events, smaller sources of misreconstructed leptons affecting this category of background are given by the misreconstruction of hadrons, the production of muons from light-meson decays, and the reconstruction of electrons from unidentified photon conversions. The background yield is estimated from data using a sample of events that satisfy the full analysis selection, except that one of the two leptons is required to pass a looser lepton selection and fail the full selection (sideband region). The background rate is then obtained weighting the events in this sideband region by the “tight-to-loose” ratio, i.e. the probability for a loosely identified lepton to pass the full set of requirements. This tight-to-loose ratio is measured as a function of lepton pT and η in a control sample of dijet events, which is depleted of prompt leptons and is selected by dedicated single-muon and single-electron triggers. The systematic uncertainty in the background estimate is due to the differences in the various sources of non-prompt or misidentified leptons, between the dijet events where the tight-to-loose ratio is measured and the sideband region where the ratio is applied. Among the most important differences are the pT spectrum and the flavour of the jets containing the misidentified leptons. These two quantities have been varied in the control sample using appropriate selections and then the effects on the tight-to-loose ratio, and on the background estimate itself, have been quantified. The range of variation for these two quantities has been guided by a simulation of the background processes. The full systematic uncertainty in the background is estimated to be 50 %. The statistical part of the uncertainty is driven by the number of events in the sideband region and it is significantly smaller than the systematic uncertainty for all six signal regions.

The probability to misidentify the charge of muons is about an order of magnitude smaller than for electrons. Therefore the magnitude of the background caused by charge misidentification, mostly in Drell–Yan and tt¯ events, is driven only by electrons. This background is estimated by selecting opposite-sign e e or e μ events that pass the full analysis selection, except the same-sign requirement, and then weighting them by the pT- and η-dependent probability for electron charge misassignment. This probability and its variation as a function of the lepton pT and η are determined by combining information from simulation and a control data sample of Zee events. For the electron selection used in this analysis, the probability of charge misidentification is about 10-4 and 10-3 for electrons reconstructed in the barrel and endcap detectors, respectively. The background estimate has an uncertainty of 30 % (15 %) for the e e (e μ) signal regions. This uncertainty accounts for differences between data and simulation, and the limited momentum range of electrons in the Z-boson control sample.

Production of WZ and tt¯Z events, and the irreducible backgrounds, are all estimated from simulation as done when calculating the signal selection efficiencies. For each SM process contributing to this category of background, the dominant systematic uncertainty is the one in the theoretical cross section prediction. Depending on the process, we use an uncertainty of 15–50 % and consider it as fully correlated across all signal regions.

Same-sign dilepton results

After the full analysis selection is applied, 36 events are observed in data, to be compared with 25.2±3.4(syststat) events expected from background processes and 39.7±3.5(syststat) events from the sum of background and tt¯W signal with the SM cross section. For both predictions, the statistical and systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature.

The event yields, along with the corresponding uncertainties for each background component, are reported in Table 1. The top left panel of Fig. 2 shows the distribution of the expected and observed events across the six different signal regions, and for all dilepton channels added together. As already anticipated, the positively charged channels are expected to collect a larger quantity of signal than the negatively charged channels, for a comparable quantity of background. The first three channels therefore drive the sensitivity of this analysis. In Table 1 and Fig. 2, and in the equivalent tables and figures for the other two leptonic channels, the uncertainty in the signal cross section is not shown because it does not affect the precision of the experimental measurement.

Table 1.

Expected signal, estimated backgrounds, the sum of the two, and observed number of events for the μ±μ±, e±μ±, and e±e± channels. Uncertainties include both the statistical and the systematic components. The systematic uncertainty in the signal contribution does not include the theoretical uncertainty in the signal production cross section

μ+μ+ e+μ+ e+e+ μ-μ- e-μ- e-e-
tt¯W (expected) 2.8±0.4 5.1±0.5 2.2±0.3 1.1±0.2 2.3±0.3 1.0±0.2
Misidentified lepton 1.0±0.6 4.1±2.1 1.6±0.9 0.7±0.4 3.0±1.5 1.7±0.9
Mismeasured charge 0.4±0.1 0.7±0.2 0.4±0.1 0.7±0.2
Irreducible 0.7±0.4 1.6±0.9 0.9±0.5 0.5±0.3 1.4±0.7 0.7±0.4
WZ 0.1±0.1 0.4±0.1 0.1±0.1 0.1±0.1 0.4±0.1 0.2±0.1
tt¯Z 0.6±0.3 0.9±0.5 0.5±0.3 0.4±0.2 1.0±0.5 0.5±0.3
Total background 2.4±0.7 7.4±2.3 3.9±1.1 1.7±0.5 6.1±1.8 3.7±1.1
Total expected 5.2±0.8 12.5±2.4 6.1±1.1 2.8±0.5 8.4±1.8 4.7±1.1
Observed 6 12 5 1 6 6

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Event yields in data after final dilepton selection requirements, compared to the background estimates and signal expectations. Contributions separated by final states (top left), trijets mass distribution for the hadronic top-quark candidate (top right), HT distribution (bottom left), and the leading-lepton pT distribution (bottom right). The combination of statistical and systematic uncertainties is denoted by the shaded area

The other three panels of Fig. 2 show the distributions for the invariant mass mbjj of the three jets expected to originate from the hadronic top-quark decay (top right), HT (bottom left), and the leading-lepton pT (bottom right) for all six signal regions combined together. For each event, the three signal jets used for the mbjj distribution are selected as follows: one, and only one, of the three jets is b-tagged; among the possible three-jet combinations the one chosen minimizes ΔRjjj=(ΔRj1,t)2+(ΔRj2,t)2+(ΔRj3,t)2, where ΔRji,t is the ΔR distance between the direction of the ith jet and the direction of the reconstructed hadronic top-quark candidate. In all four distributions data and simulation are found in agreement. In particular, the mbjj distribution confirms that most of the background from misidentified leptons is originating from top-quark events. In Fig. 2, and also in all other similar figures included in this document, the error bar enclosing each data point represents the 68 % confidence level interval around the mean of the corresponding Poisson distribution.

Based on the observed number of events, the background estimates, and the signal acceptance (including the leptonic branching fractions), the inclusive tt¯W production cross section is measured, through the combination of the six dilepton channels, as

σtt¯W=170-80+90(stat)±70(syst)fb,

including statistical and systematic uncertainties, compared to the SM expectation of 206-23+21fb. The significance of the result over the background-only hypothesis is equivalent to 1.6 standard deviations (2.0 standard deviations expected).

The systematic uncertainty in the signal selection efficiency is 8 %. It is treated in a common way with the three- and four-lepton channels and is discussed in detail in Sect. 7. Additionally, for all channels there is a 2.6 % uncertainty in the expected yield of signal and simulation-derived background events because of the uncertainty in the luminosity normalization [36]. However, together with the low yield of signal events, the main factor dominating the uncertainty in the cross section measurement is the uncertainty in the largest background component, i.e. the 50 % uncertainty in the background from misidentified leptons.

Trilepton analysis

The production of a tt¯ pair in association with a Z boson is analysed in the final state with three high-energy, isolated, and prompt leptons. The trilepton analysis targets final states with only one W boson decaying leptonically:

pptt¯Z(tbν)(tbqq¯)(Z¯).

The event selection, described in more detail below, focuses on the main features of this final state: two oppositely charged leptons of the same flavour, consistent with the Z-boson decay; an additional lepton; and at least four jets, at least two of which are b-tagged. The isolation of the leptons has additionally been loosened to reflect the diminished contribution of misidentified leptons to the background.

The selection for the trilepton channel is conducted through the following steps:

  1. Each event must contain three isolated leptons of pT>20GeV and passing identification requirements described in Sect. 3. All three leptons are required to be compatible with the signal primary vertex and have a relative isolation smaller than 9 % (10 %) for electrons (muons).

  2. Two of the leptons must be of the same flavour, be oppositely charged, and form an invariant mass between 81 and 101GeV to be consistent with a Z-boson decay. If multiple pairs pass this selection, the one with the mass closest to the known Z-boson mass is selected as the Z boson candidate.

  3. To match the final-state signal topology, four or more signal jets must be reconstructed with at least three of these jets having pT>30GeV, and the fourth jet is required to have pT>15GeV. Additional identification and pileup suppression selections are applied as described in Sect. 3.

  4. At least two of the jets with pT>30GeV must be b-tagged, the first using the medium working point of the CSV algorithm, and the second using the loose working point.

  5. Events are rejected if they contain a fourth lepton with a loosened transverse momentum requirement of pT>10 GeV, in order not to overlap with the four-lepton analysis.

These event selections have been optimized for the best precision on the expected measured cross section. A broad range of variations to the applied requirements has been considered in the optimization: including in the event selections a minimum number of jets, minimum jet pT, as well as HT; changing the number of jets required to be b-tagged; and varying the lepton momentum and isolation thresholds. Estimates of the expected backgrounds used in the optimization of the final requirements have been made both with initial estimates from simulation alone as well as with events in data control samples using the methods described below.

Background estimation

Backgrounds passing the analysis selections are separated into three components: irreducible contributions from events with three prompt leptons and two b-quark jets (irreducible component), primarily with at least one top quark in the process; those with three prompt leptons and b-tagged jets without top-quark contributions (non-top-quark component); and contributions with at least one misidentified lepton (misidentified lepton component). This categorization is driven by the choice of methods used to estimate the backgrounds.

The irreducible component is split evenly among single-top-quark production in association with a Z boson (t b Z), tt¯H, and tt¯W production; additional contributions from production of three bosons and tt¯ associated with an isolated photon or two additional vector bosons are much smaller, but are still considered. Since the tt¯W contribution is constrained by measurements in other (primarily the same-sign dilepton) final states, its expected SM contribution of 0.2±0.1(stat) events is quoted separately. The remaining irreducible background contributions are estimated directly from simulation: 0.77±0.04(stat)±0.39(syst) events are expected. The systematic uncertainty in this background is conservatively estimated to be 50 %, dominated by the uncertainty in the cross section, in accordance with corresponding values used in Sect. 4.1. This systematic uncertainty is applied also to the tt¯W contribution and serves as an initial constraint to the combined measurement, as discussed in Sect. 8.

The non-top-quark component contributions are primarily from events with three prompt leptons and b-tagged jets from misidentified light-flavour jets or b-quark jets arising from initial- or final-state radiation. In simulation, this contribution is dominated by W Z events. Because neither the absolute rate of extra jet production from radiation and higher-order diagrams, nor the flavour composition of additional jets are well simulated [37], we rely on data to predict this background.

A sideband sample with three leptons and no b-tagged jets, with all other selections applied, is dominated by non-top-quark backgrounds and is used to normalize the non-top-quark component prediction. The method to predict the non-top-quark backgrounds relies on the ratio Rb of the number of events passing the analysis b-tagging requirements relative to those not having b-tagged jets. This ratio is assumed to be the same as for inclusive Z+jets production (with the Z boson decaying leptonically) for events passing the same jet selections. We derive the Rb in a sample of events with opposite-sign same-flavour leptons passing the same identification requirements as in the trilepton sample. The contribution of tt¯ and other flavour-symmetric backgrounds is subtracted using opposite-flavour dilepton events after a correction for a difference in the lepton selection efficiency. For the final prediction of the non-top-quark component, an additional correction Cb=1.4±0.2(stat) is applied based on the difference between the prediction and observation in simulation. This is done to account for residual differences in the kinematic properties of jets between Z+jets events and the trilepton non-top-quark background. The Rb measured in dilepton events in data is 0.160±0.003(stat). The non-top-quark component is predicted to contribute 2.3±0.5(stat)±1.1(syst) events. The systematic uncertainty of approximately 50 % is estimated as a combination of observed difference of Rb in the dilepton events between data and simulation and the deviation of Cb from unity.

Finally, the misidentified-lepton background component is estimated with a method similar to that of the same-sign dilepton analysis, described in Sect. 4.1. In each of the four final states the control sample is culled from events passing the trilepton signal event selections except that only one of the leptons is required to fail the isolation and identification requirements, still passing looser requirements. Similar to the same-sign dilepton analysis, the ratio of misidentified leptons passing full identification and isolation selections relative to the loosened requirements (the tight-to-loose ratio) is modelled to be the same in the trilepton events as in a sample with one lepton candidate and a jet. The modelling is tested in simulation, where the tight-to-loose ratio is measured in simulated multijet events and is then applied to the dominant background sample, i.e. tt¯ production. The level of agreement between predicted and observed background in simulation gives the leading source of systematic uncertainty in the method, estimated to be roughly 50 %. Combined in all trilepton final states, the misidentified lepton component is estimated to be 1.2±0.5(stat)±0.6(syst) events.

Trilepton results

The 12 events observed in data are consistent with the sum of the estimated backgrounds, 4.4±1.6(syststat) events, and the expected signal, 7.8±0.9(syststat) events. These results are summarized in Table 2 and illustrated in Fig. 3, which shows corresponding contributions in separate channels as well as several characteristic distributions. The trijet mass for the hadronic top-quark candidate is calculated with the same method as in Sect. 4.2.

Table 2.

Expected signal, estimated backgrounds, the sum of the two, and observed number of events for the trilepton channel. Uncertainties include both the statistical and the systematic components. The systematic uncertainty in the signal contribution does not include the theoretical uncertainty in the signal production cross section

Yield
tt¯Z (expected) 7.8±0.9
Irreducible 0.8±0.4
tt¯W 0.2±0.1
Non-top-quark 2.3±1.2
Misidentified lepton 1.1±0.8
Total background 4.4±1.6
Total expected 12.2±1.8
Observed 12

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Event yields in data after final trilepton selection requirements, compared to the background estimates and signal expectations. Contributions separated by final states where the two leptons consistent with the Z boson are indicated inside parenthesis on the bin labels (top left), trijets mass distribution for the hadronic top-quark candidate (top right), Z-boson candidate dilepton mass distribution (bottom left), and the distribution of the number of b-tagged jets passing medium operating point of the b-tagger (bottom right). The combination of statistical and systematic uncertainties is denoted by the shaded area

The systematic uncertainty in the cross section measurement arises from uncertainties in the background yields and in the estimate of the signal selection efficiency. For the signal event selection, the dominant sources of systematic uncertainty are the modelling of the lepton selection and the uncertainty in the jet energy scale. They produce 6 and 5 % uncertainty in the signal selection efficiency, respectively, and sum to a total of 10 % systematic uncertainty together with the other sources of uncertainty described in Sect. 7.

Based on the observed number of events, the background estimates, and the signal acceptance, of 0.0021±0.0001(stat)±0.0002(syst), the inclusive tt¯Z production cross section in the trilepton analysis is measured as

σtt¯Z,3=190-80+100(stat)±40(syst)fb,

including statistical and systematic uncertainties, compared to the SM expectation of 197-25+22fb. The significance of the result over the background-only hypothesis is equivalent to 2.3 standard deviations, compared to the expected value of 2.4. This result is combined with the four-lepton analysis and the same-sign dilepton analysis, as described in Sect. 8.

Four-lepton analysis

The aim of the four-lepton analysis is to select events originating from the process:

pptt¯Z(tbν)(tbν)(Z¯).

These events are characterized by a pair of same-flavour, opposite-sign leptons (e and μ) with an invariant mass that is close to the nominal Z-boson mass and two additional prompt leptons.

Since the branching fraction of tt¯Z to four leptons is very low, it is a challenge to maintain high signal efficiency and at the same time reject as much background as possible. To that end, the events are separated into two categories, one of which has a significantly higher signal-to-background ratio than the other. The event selection has been optimized using the signal significance from simulated events and is summarized in the following:

  1. Events must have a total of four leptons passing the lepton identification criteria described in Sect. 3. Each electron (muon) is required to have relative isolation smaller than 9(10)%.

  2. The highest lepton pT must be greater than 20GeV. The remaining leptons must have pT>10 GeV.

  3. Two of the leptons must form an opposite-sign same-flavour pair with the dilepton mass between 76 and 106GeV.

  4. The remaining two opposite-sign leptons must not form a same-flavour pair with the dilepton mass between 76 and 106GeV.

  5. At least one jet must pass the medium CSV b-tagging selection.

  6. At least one other jet must pass the loose CSV b-tagging selection.

The high signal-to-background signal region requires that events pass all of the criteria above. A second signal region requires that they pass the first five conditions and fail the sixth. These two four-lepton channels are exclusive.

Background estimation

The standard model can produce four genuine, prompt leptons through multiboson+jets production where at least two bosons decay leptonically. Backgrounds to this search include ZZ, WWZ, WZZ, ZZZ, and rarer processes. They can prove irreducible if the multiboson production is accompanied by b-tagged jets arising from the underlying event or initial-state radiation (irreducible background).

The contribution from irreducible background processes is estimated using MC simulations. The process with the largest contribution in the four-lepton signal regions comes from the ZZ process. The main concern with taking this background estimate solely from a simulation is how well the rate at which bottom quarks are produced is modelled. Since these bottom quarks mainly originate from initial-state radiation, this rate is estimated in a data sample of leptonically-decaying Z bosons with two additional jets. For events in this sample the probability to pass the two b-tagging criteria is found to be about 4 %. Rescaling by this number the events in the appropriate ZZ enhanced region measured in data, the background estimate is found to agree very well with the estimate from simulations. Therefore, the latter estimate is used in the analysis.

Another source of background arises when electrons and muons are incorrectly identified as prompt and isolated (misidentified lepton background). These can either result from misreconstruction of hadrons or from non-prompt or non-isolated leptons passing the selection criteria. Isolated tracks are used as a proxy for misidentified leptons and to calculate a “track-to-lepton” ratio, which depends on the heavy-flavour content and jet activity. The track-to-lepton ratio is determined by measuring the number of prompt, isolated tracks and the number of prompt, isolated leptons after the contribution to the leptons from electroweak processes has been subtracted. It is calculated in two control regions in data: a region with leptonic decays of Z bosons and a region with semi-leptonic decays of tt¯ pairs. The two regions cover the extremes of how much heavy-flavour content is expected in different event samples. The ratio is then interpolated between these two regions using a linear mixing of the two control samples and parameterized as a function of the variable Rn-p/p, which is the ratio of non-isolated, non-prompt tracks to non-isolated, prompt tracks in the sample. A track is defined as prompt when its transverse impact parameter is less than 200μm, and non-prompt otherwise. The variable Rn-p/p is used in the parameterization of the track-to-lepton ratio since it quantifies the amount of heavy-flavour content in the events of a given sample. The validity of the parameterization is checked in a third control region that requires one dilepton pair consistent with the Z boson and at least one b-tagged jet: for this sample, whose heavy-flavour content is expected to be in between those of the two previous control regions, Rn-p/p is calculated, and the predicted and observed track-to-lepton ratios are compared and found in agreement. Finally, two sideband regions with one dilepton pair consistent with the Z boson and a third lepton, and which also satisfy the two b-tagging categorizations are defined. By calculating Rn-p/p and using the track-to-lepton parameterization, the probability for isolated, prompt tracks to be misidentified as electrons (muons) is found equal to 7.4±2.2% (1.6±0.5%) in these two samples. To determine the number of background events in the signal regions, the yields in the sideband regions are then multiplied by the track-to-lepton ratios and the relevant combinatoric factors depending on the number of isolated tracks present in the events. A background yield of 0.1±0.1 (0.5±0.2) in the 2 b-jet (1 b-jet) signal region is calculated in this way.

Four-lepton results

Applying the full event selection, the event yields shown in Table 3 are obtained. A total of 4 events are observed, compared to a background expectation of 1.4±0.3 events, where the uncertainty in the background prediction contains both the contributions from the limited number of simulated events and from the uncertainties related to the rescaling procedure based on control samples in data. The results are shown in Fig. 4 (top). A comparison of the ETmiss distributions for the background, signal, and observed data, combining the two signal regions, is shown in Fig. 4 (bottom).

Table 3.

Expected signal, estimated backgrounds, the sum of the two, and observed number of events for the four-lepton channel. Uncertainties include both the statistical and the systematic components. The systematic uncertainty in the signal contribution does not include the theoretical uncertainty in the signal production cross section. The ZZ component of the background is shown separately from the rest of the irreducible processes

2 b Jets required 1 b Jet required
tt¯Z (expected) 1.3 ± 0.2 1.3 ± 0.2
Misidentified lepton 0.1 ± 0.1 0.5 ± 0.2
ZZ 0.05 ± 0.01 0.47 ± 0.02
Irreducible 0.04 ± 0.03 0.14 ± 0.04
Total background 0.2 ± 0.1 1.1 ± 0.2
Total expected 1.5 ± 0.2 2.4 ± 0.3
Observed 2 2

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Event yields in data after final four-lepton selection requirements, compared to the background estimates and signal expectations. Contributions in the 1 b-tagged jet and 2 b-tagged jets signal regions (top) and inclusive ETmiss distribution (bottom). The ZZ component of the background is shown separately from the rest of the irreducible processes. The combination of statistical and systematic uncertainties is denoted by the shaded area

The systematic uncertainties in the selection efficiencies for signal and irreducible background are derived in the same way as for the dilepton and trilepton channels and are described in Sect. 7. For the four-lepton analysis, the dominant source of uncertainty in the signal acceptance is the 8 % uncertainty in the modelling of the lepton selection. Together with the other systematic uncertainties, it sums to a total uncertainty of 11 % in the signal selection efficiency.

By performing a simultaneous fit to the two exclusive four-lepton signal regions, the following cross section is extracted:

σtt¯Z,4=230-130+180(stat)-30+60(syst)fb.

The significance is equal to 2.2 standard deviations (2.0 standard deviations expected).

Systematic uncertainties in signal selection efficiency

Along with the corresponding techniques for the background estimation, the uncertainties in the estimates of the backgrounds affecting the three channels have been presented respectively in Sects. 4, 5, and 6. Here are illustrated the uncertainties in the selection efficiency of signal events.

Except for the component due to trigger, simulation is used to estimate the selection efficiency for signal. Control samples in data are used to correct the selection acceptance estimated in simulation and to assess the corresponding uncertainty. A similar approach is employed for all three analysis channels and therefore a common list of systematic uncertainties in signal acceptance can be summarized as in Table 4. The total uncertainty in the computed acceptance varies between 8 and 11 % depending on the channel.

Table 4.

Systematic uncertainties in the signal selection efficiency for the three considered channels: tt¯W in dilepton (2) final state; tt¯Z in trilepton (3) and four-lepton (4) final states

Source of uncertainty Channels
2 3 4
Uncertainty (%)
Modelling of trigger eff. 3 1 1
Modelling of lepton sel. (ID/isolation) 4 6 8
Jet energy scale and resolution 4 5 4
Identification of b jets 2 3 3
Pileup modelling 1 1 1
Choice of parton distribution functions 1.5 1.5 1.5
Signal model 5 5 5
Total 8 10 11

The trigger efficiency is directly measured in data using control samples selected by HT triggers that are orthogonal to the dilepton triggers employed by the three analyses to select signal event candidates [9]. Trigger inefficiencies are then applied to all acceptances calculated from simulation, for both signal and the background processes derived from simulation.

The offline lepton selection efficiencies in data and simulation are measured using Z-boson events to derive simulation-to-data correction factors. The correction factors applied to simulation are about 0.94 (0.98) for pT > 20GeV for electrons (muons). The uncertainty in the per-lepton selection efficiency is about 1.5 % (0.3 %) for electrons (muons) with pT >20 GeV. An additional systematic uncertainty is assigned to account for potential mismodelling of the lepton isolation efficiency due to the larger hadronic activity in signal events than in Z-boson events. This uncertainty is in the 2–3 % range. These per-lepton uncertainties are propagated to calculate the uncertainties in the selection efficiency of signal events, which are found to be in the 4–8 % range depending on the leptonic final state.

Another source of systematic uncertainty is associated with the jet energy scale correction. This systematic uncertainty varies between 5 and 2 % in the pT range 40–100GeV for jets with |η|<2.4 [22]. It is evaluated on a single-jet basis, and its effect is propagated to HT, the number of jets, and the number of b-tagged jets. In addition, there is a contribution to the total uncertainty arising from limited knowledge of the resolution of the jet energy, but this effect is generally of less importance than the contribution from the jet energy scale.

The b-tagging efficiency for b-quark jets, and the mistagging probabilities for charm-quark jets and for jets originating from light-flavour quarks or gluons, are estimated from data [38]. The corresponding correction factors, dependent on jet flavour and kinematic properties, are applied to simulated jets to account for the differences in the tagging efficiency between simulation and data. The total uncertainty in the signal acceptance caused by the b-tagging selection is determined by varying the correction factors up and down by their uncertainties.

In the simulation of signal events, different pileup conditions have been probed varying the cross section for inelastic pp collisions by ±5 %. Comparing the signal selection efficiency for these different conditions, the uncertainty associated to pileup effects is found to be approximately 1 %. The uncertainty in the signal acceptance due to the PDF choice [13, 3942] is found to be 1.5 %. An uncertainty of the order of 5 % in the signal acceptance is also assigned to the finite-order calculation employed to generate signal events. This last uncertainty, which covers also the uncertainty in the effects of initial- and final-state radiation, is estimated varying from their nominal values the matrix-element/parton-shower matching scale (with the nominal value of 20GeV), and the renormalization and factorization scales (with the nominal value equal to Q2 in the event). For the up and down variations of the matching scale, thresholds of 40 and 10GeV are used, respectively. Renormalization and factorization scales are varied between 4Q2 and Q2/4. The signal model uncertainty also includes the difference in acceptance between signal events simulated with MadGraph 5 and amc@nlo  [15] generators.

Results

To extract the cross sections for the tt¯W and tt¯Z  processes, the nine different channels are combined to maximize their sensitivity. Cross section central values and corresponding uncertainties are evaluated from a scan of the profile likelihood ratio. The adopted statistical procedure is the same that was used for the observation of the Higgs boson candidate in CMS, and is described in detail in Ref. [29].

The results of the measurements are summarized in Table 5. Two one-dimensional fits are performed to measure tt¯W and tt¯Z separately using the channels most sensitive to each process. Using only the same-sign dilepton channels, the extracted tt¯W cross section is measured to be 170-80+90(stat)±70(syst) fb, corresponding to a significance of 1.6 standard deviations over the background-only hypothesis. The three and four lepton channels are combined to extract a tt¯Z cross section of 200-70+80(stat)-30+40(syst) fb, with a significance of 3.1 standard deviations.

Table 5.

Results of the extraction of cross sections, from single and combined channels. The significance is expressed in terms of standard deviations

Channels used Process Cross section Significance
2 tt¯W 170-80+90(stat)±70(syst) fb 1.6
3+4 tt¯Z 200-70+80(stat)-30+40(syst) fb 3.1
2+3+4 tt¯W + tt¯Z 380-90+100(stat)-70+80(syst) fb 3.7

When calculating the one-dimensional fit of one process, the cross section of the other process is constrained to have the theoretical SM value with a systematic uncertainty of 50 %.

As visible from Fig. 2 and Table 1, less than 10 % of the events selected by the same-sign dilepton channels are expected to stem from tt¯Z production. The extracted tt¯W cross section varies by approximately 10 % when the used tt¯Z cross section is altered to as much as 0.5–1.5 times its nominal theoretical value. For an equivalent modification of the tt¯W production rate, the variation of the extracted tt¯Z cross section is less than 2 %. The dependence of the measured cross section on the assumed cross section of the other tt¯V process is solved by performing a simultaneous fit of the cross sections of the two processes using all dilepton, trilepton, and four-lepton channels at the same time.

The result of the fit is shown visually in Fig. 5 and the cross sections are summarized numerically in Table 6. The cross sections extracted from this two-dimensional fit are identical to those obtained from the two one-dimensional fits.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

The result of the two-dimensional best fit for tt¯W and tt¯Z cross sections (cross symbol) is shown along with its 68 and 95 % confidence level contours. The result of this fit is superimposed with the separate tt¯W and tt¯Z cross section measurements, and the corresponding 1 standard deviation (1σ) bands, obtained from the dilepton, and the trilepton/four-lepton channels, respectively. The figure also shows the predictions from theory and the corresponding uncertainties

Table 6.

Results for the two dimensional fit of the tt¯W and tt¯Z cross sections

Channels used tt¯W cross section tt¯Z cross section
2+3+4 170-100+110(total) fb 200±90(total) fb

Finally, a one-dimensional fit of all channels is performed to extract a combined cross section σtt¯V=380-90+100(stat)-70+80(syst) fb with a significance of 3.7 standard deviations.

Summary

A measurement with the CMS detector of the cross section of top quark–antiquark pair production in association with a W or Z boson at s=8 TeV has been presented. Results from three independent channels, and their combination, have been reported. In the same-sign dilepton channel, the tt¯W cross section has been measured to be σtt¯W=170-80+90(stat)±70(syst)fb, corresponding to a significance of 1.6 standard deviations over the background-only hypothesis. In the trilepton and four-lepton channels the tt¯Z signal has been established with a significance of 2.3 and 2.2 standard deviations, respectively. From the combination of these two channels, a significance of 3.1 standard deviations has been obtained and the cross section has been measured to be σtt¯Z=200-70+80(stat)-30+40(syst)fb.

Combining the total of nine sub-channels from the three lepton decay modes, a tt¯V cross section (V equal W or Z) of σtt¯V=380-90+100(stat)-70+80(syst)fb has been obtained, corresponding to a combined significance of 3.7 standard deviations. The measured values are compatible within their uncertainties with standard model predictions.

Acknowledgments

We congratulate our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments for the excellent performance of the LHC and thank the technical and administrative staffs at CERN and at other CMS institutes for their contributions to the success of the CMS effort. In addition, we gratefully acknowledge the computing centres and personnel of the Worldwide LHC Computing Grid for delivering so effectively the computing infrastructure essential to our analyses. Finally, we acknowledge the enduring support for the construction and operation of the LHC and the CMS detector provided by the following funding agencies: BMWFW and FWF (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES and CSF (Croatia); RPF (Cyprus); MoER, ERC IUT and ERDF (Estonia); Academy of Finland, MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NIH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); NRF and WCU (Republic of Korea); LAS (Lithuania); MOE and UM (Malaysia); CINVESTAV, CONACYT, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MBIE (New Zealand); PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Dubna); MON, RosAtom, RAS and RFBR (Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI and CPAN (Spain); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); MST (Taipei); ThEPCenter, IPST, STAR and NSTDA (Thailand); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); NASU and SFFR (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA). Individuals have received support from the Marie-Curie programme and the European Research Council and EPLANET (European Union); the Leventis Foundation; the A. P. Sloan Foundation; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office; the Fonds pour la Formation à la Recherche dans l’Industrie et dans l’Agriculture (FRIA-Belgium); the Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie (IWT-Belgium); the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic; the Council of Science and Industrial Research, India; the HOMING PLUS programme of Foundation for Polish Science, cofinanced from European Union, Regional Development Fund; the Compagnia di San Paolo (Torino); the Thalis and Aristeia programmes cofinanced by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; and the National Priorities Research Program by Qatar National Research Fund.

Contributor Information

The CMS Collaboration, Email: cms-publication-committee-chair@cern.ch.

[Authorinst]The CMS Collaboration, Email: cms-publication-committee-chair@cern.ch.

References

  • 1.CDF Collaboration, Observation of top quark production in p¯p collisions with the collider detector at fermilab. Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2626 (1995). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.2626. arXiv:hep-ex/9503002 [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 2.D0 Collaboration, Observation of the top quark. Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2632 (1995). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.2632 [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 3.Glashow SL. Partial-symmetries of weak interactions. Nucl. Phys. 1961;22:579. doi: 10.1016/0029-5582(61)90469-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.S. Weinberg, A model of leptons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 19, 1264 (1967). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.1264
  • 5.A. Salam, in Elementary Particle Physics: Relativistic Groups and Analyticity. Weak and Electromagnetic Interactions. Proceedings of the Eighth Nobel Symposium, ed. by N. Svartholm (Almqvist & Wiskell, 1968), p. 367
  • 6.Barnett RM, Gunion JF, Haber HE. Discovering supersymmetry with like-sign dileptons. Phys. Lett. B. 1993;315:349. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(93)91623-U. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Guchait M, Roy DP. Like-sign dilepton signature for gluino production at CERN LHC including top quark and Higgs boson effects. Phys. Rev. D. 1995;52:133. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.52.133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Baer H, Chen C-H, Paige F, Tata X. Signals for minimal supergravity at the CERN large hadron collider. II: Multi-lepton channels. Phys. Rev. D. 1996;53:6241. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.53.6241. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.CMS Collaboration, Search for new physics in events with same-sign dileptons and jets in pp collisions at s = 8 TeV. JHEP 01, 163 (2014). doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2014)163. arXiv:1311.6736
  • 10.CMS Collaboration, Search for anomalous production of multilepton events in pp collisions at s=7 TeV. JHEP 06, 169 (2012). doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2012)169. arXiv:1204.5341
  • 11.CDF Collaboration, Evidence for tt¯γ Production and Measurement of σtt¯γ/σtt¯. Phys. Rev. D 84, 031104 (2011). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.031104. arXiv:1106.3970
  • 12.CMS Collaboration, Measurement of associated production of vector bosons and top quark-antiquark pairs at s = 7 TeV. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 172002 (2013). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.172002. arXiv:1303.3239 [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 13.Lai H-L, et al. New parton distributions for collider physics. Phys. Rev. D. 2010;82:074024. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.074024. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.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, 079 (2014). doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079. arXiv:1405.0301
  • 15.Frixione S, Webber BR. Matching NLO QCD computations and parton shower simulations. JHEP. 2002;06:029. doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2002/06/029. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.J.M. Campbell, R.K. Ellis, tt¯W± production and decay at NLO. JHEP 07, 052 (2012). doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2012)052. arXiv:1204.5678
  • 17.M.V. Garzelli, A. Kardos, C.G. Papadopoulos, Z. Trocsanyi, tt¯W± and ttZ¯ hadroproduction at NLO accuracy in QCD with Parton Shower and Hadronization effects. JHEP 11, 056 (2012). doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2012)056. arXiv:1208.2665
  • 18.CMS Collaboration, The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC. JINST 3, S08004 (2008). doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004
  • 19.CMS Collaboration, Particle-Flow Event Reconstruction in CMS and Performance for Jets, Taus, and ETmiss”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary. CMS-PAS-PFT-09-001 (2009)
  • 20.CMS Collaboration, Commissioning of the Particle-flow Event Reconstruction with the first LHC collisions recorded in the CMS detector, CMS Physics Analysis Summary. CMS-PAS-PFT-10-001 (2010)
  • 21.Cacciari M, Salam GP, Soyez G. The anti-kt jet clustering algorithm. JHEP. 2008;04:063. doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.CMS Collaboration, Determination of jet energy calibration and transverse momentum resolution in CMS. JINST 6, P11002 (2011). doi:10.1088/1748-0221/6/11/P11002. arXiv:1107.4277
  • 23.Cacciari M, Salam GP, Soyez G. The catchment area of jets. JHEP. 2008;04:005. doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.CMS Collaboration, Measurements of differential jet cross sections in proton-proton collisions at s=7 TeV with the CMS detector. Phys. Rev. D 87, 112002 (2013). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.112002. arXiv:1212.6660
  • 25.CMS Collaboration, Pileup Jet Identification, CMS Physics Analysis Summary. CMS-PAS-JME-13-005 (2013)
  • 26.CMS Collaboration, Performance of b tagging at s=8 TeV in multijet, ttbar and boosted topology events, CMS Physics Analysis Summary. CMS-PAS-BTV-13-001 (2013)
  • 27.CMS Collaboration, Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at s=7 TeV. JINST 7, P10002 (2012). doi:10.1088/1748-0221/7/10/P10002. arXiv:1206.4071
  • 28.CMS Collaboration, Electron Reconstruction and Identification at s=7 TeV, CMS Physics Analysis Summary. CMS-PAS-EGM-10-004 (2010)
  • 29.CMS Collaboration, Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at s = 7 and 8 TeV. JHEP 06, 081 (2013). doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2013)081. arXiv:1303.4571
  • 30.J. Alwall et al., MadGraph 5: going beyond. JHEP 06, 128 (2011). doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2011)128. arXiv:1106.0522
  • 31.T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna, P.Z. Skands, Pythia 6.4 physics and manual, JHEP 05 026 (2006). doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2006/05/026. arXiv:hep-ph/0603175
  • 32.GEANT4 Collaboration, Geant4—a simulation toolkit. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506, 250 (2003). doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8
  • 33.Nadolsky PM, et al. Implications of CTEQ global analysis for collider observables. Phys. Rev. D. 2008;78:013004. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.013004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Particle Data Group Collaboration, Phys. Rev. D Review of particle physics. 86, 010001 (2012). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.010001
  • 35.CMS Collaboration, Study of double parton scattering using W + 2-jet events in proton-proton collisions at s = 7 TeV. JHEP 03, 032 (2014). doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2014)032. arXiv:1312.5729
  • 36.CMS Collaboration, CMS Luminosity Based on Pixel Cluster Counting-Summer 2013 Update, CMS Physics Analysis Summary. CMS-PAS-LUM-13-001 (2013)
  • 37.CMS Collaboration, Measurement of BB¯ angular correlations based on secondary vertex reconstruction at s=7 TeV. JHEP 03, 136 (2011). doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2011)136. arXiv:1102.3194
  • 38.CMS Collaboration, Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment. JINST 8, P04013 (2013). doi:10.1088/1748-0221/8/04/P04013. arXiv:1211.4462
  • 39.S. Alekhin et al., The PDF4LHC Working Group Interim Report (2011) arXiv:1101.0536
  • 40.M. Botje et al., The PDF4LHC Working Group Interim Recommendations (2011). arXiv:1101.0538
  • 41.NNPDF Collaboration, Impact of heavy quark masses on parton distributions and LHC Phenomenology, Nucl. Phys. B 849, 296 (2011). doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2011.03.021. arXiv:1101.1300
  • 42.Martin AD, Stirling WJ, Thorne RS, Watt G. Parton distributions for the LHC. Eur. Phys. J. C. 2009;63:189. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-009-1072-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The European Physical Journal. C, Particles and Fields are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES