Table 4.

Compatibility of different models with the differential measurement of the top quark mass. For each variable and model, the probability of the cumulative ${\chi }^2$ is computed. The setup with powheg  v2 + herwig++ does not use ME corrections to the top quark decay and shows large deviations from the data

Model	${\chi }^2$ probability
	$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{t},\text{had}}$	$m_{\text{t}\overline{\text{t}}}$	$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{t}\overline{\text{t}}}$	$N_{\text{jets}}$	$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{b},\text{had}}$	$|{\eta }^{\text{b},\text{had}}|$	$\Delta R_{\text{b}\overline{\text{b}}}$	$\Delta R_{\text{q}{\overline{\text{q}}}^{\prime }}$
powhegp8 M2T4	0.68	0.94	0.91	0.71	0.98	0.60	0.61	0.70
MG5 p8 [FxFx] M2T4	0.98	0.78	0.93	0.94	0.80	0.35	0.94	0.91
MG5 p8 [MLM] M1	0.48	0.84	0.99	0.41	0.98	0.17	0.71	0.61
powhegh++ EE5C	0.07	$2\times {10}^{-13}$	0.52	0.72	$2\times {10}^{-4}$	0.55	0.36	$2\times {10}^{-5}$
powhegp8 ERD on	0.75	0.99	0.83	0.53	0.95	0.64	0.38	0.96
powhegp8 QCD inspired	0.80	0.94	0.94	0.66	0.99	0.71	0.49	0.90
powhegp8 gluon move	0.87	0.94	0.93	0.72	0.93	0.51	0.59	0.93