B2G-16-028

$HeadURL:svn+ssh://svn.cern.ch/reps/tdr2/papers/B2G-16-028/trunk/B2G-16-028.tex$
$Id:B2G-16-028.tex4686692018-07-1519:54:49Zalverson$

B2G-16-015

# Search for third-generation scalar leptoquarks decaying to a top quark and a
$\tau$ lepton at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$

###### Abstract

A search for pair production of heavy scalar leptoquarks (LQs), each decaying
into a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton, is presented. The search considers final
states with an electron or a muon, one or two $\tau$ leptons that decayed to
hadrons, and additional jets. The data were collected in 2016 in proton-proton
collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$ with the CMS detector at the LHC, and
correspond to an integrated luminosity of 35.9. No evidence for pair
production of LQs is found. Assuming a branching fraction of unity for the
decay $\mathrm{LQ}\to\cPqt\tau$, upper limits on the production cross section
are set as a function of LQ mass, excluding masses below 900at 95% confidence
level. These results provide the most stringent limits to date on the
production of scalar LQs that decay to a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton.

##  0.1 Introduction

Leptoquarks (LQs) are hypothetical particles that carry non-zero baryon and
lepton quantum numbers. They are charged under all standard model (SM) gauge
groups, and their possible quantum numbers can be restricted by the assumption
that their interactions with SM fermions are renormalizable and gauge
invariant [1]. The spin of an LQ state is either 0 (scalar LQ) or 1 (vector
LQ). Leptoquarks appear in theories beyond the SM such as grand unified
theories [2, 3, 4], technicolor models [5, 6] and other compositeness
scenarios [7, 8], and R-parity-violating (RPV) supersymmetric models [9, 10].

Third-generation scalar LQs ($\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$s) have recently received
considerable theoretical interest, as their existence can explain the anomaly
in the $\PaB\to\PD\tau\PAGn$ and $\PaB\to\PDast\tau\PAGn$ decay rates reported
by the BaBar [11, 12], Belle [13, 14, 15], and LHCb [16] Collaborations. These
decay rates deviate from the SM predictions by about four standard deviations
[17], and studies of the flavor structure of LQ couplings reveal that large
couplings to third-generation quarks and leptons could explain this anomaly
[18, 19, 20, 21]. Third-generation LQs can appear in models in which only
third-generation quarks and leptons are unified [22, 23] and therefore their
existence is not constrained by proton decay experiments. All models that
predict LQs with masses at the TeV scale and sizable couplings to top quarks
and $\tau$ leptons can be probed by the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC.

Figure 1: Dominant leading order Feynman diagrams for the production of
leptoquark pairs in proton-proton collisions.

In proton-proton ($\Pp\Pp$) collisions LQs are mainly pair produced through
the quantum chromodynamic (QCD) quark-antiquark annihilation and gluon-gluon
fusion $s$\- and $t$-channel subprocesses as shown in Fig. 1. There are also
lepton-mediated $t$\- and $u$-channel contributions that depend on the unknown
lepton-quark-LQ Yukawa coupling, but these contributions to $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$
production are negligible at the LHC as they require third-generation quarks
in the initial state. Hence, the LQ pair-production cross section can be taken
to depend only on the assumed values of the LQ spin and mass, and on the
center-of-mass energy. The corresponding pair production cross sections have
been calculated up to next-to-leading order (NLO) in perturbative QCD [24].

This paper presents the first search for the production of an
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ decaying into a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton at
$\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$. The search targets $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$s with electric charges
$-5/3\,e$ and $-1/3\,e$, where $e$ is the proton charge, and with various
possible weak isospin configurations, depending on the model. A previous
search for this channel at $\sqrt{s}=8\TeV$ by the CMS Collaboration resulted
in a lower mass limit of 685for an $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ with branching fraction
$\mathcal{B}=1$ into a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton [25]. Other searches for
an $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ have targeted the decays $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}\to\cPqb\nu$ and
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}\to\cPqb\tau$ [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37,
38, 39]. The results of the search presented here are also interpreted in the
context of RPV supersymmetric models, where the supersymmetric partner of the
bottom quark (bottom squark) decays into a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton via
the RPV coupling.

We consider events with at least one electron or muon and at least one $\tau$
lepton, where the $\tau$ lepton undergoes a one- or three-prong hadronic
decay, $\tauh\to\text{hadron(s)}+\nu_{\tau}$. In
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}\overline{\mathrm{LQ}}_{3}$ events, $\tau$ leptons arise
directly from $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ decays, as well as from $\PW$ bosons in the
top quark decay chain. Electrons and muons are produced in leptonic decays of
$\PW$ bosons or $\tau$ leptons. Two search regions are used in this analysis:
a di-$\tau$ region with the signature $\ell\tauh\tauh$+jets and small
background levels from SM processes, which provides high sensitivity for
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ masses below 500, and a region with a single $\tau$ lepton
in the final state, $\ell\tauh$+jets, which has higher sensitivity for
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ masses above 500because of a larger signal efficiency. Here,
$\ell$ denotes either an electron or a muon. The dominant backgrounds in this
search come from $\ttbar$+jets and +jets production, with jets misidentified
as hadronically decaying $\tau$ leptons. These backgrounds are estimated
through measurements in control regions and extrapolated to the signal region.

In this paper, Section 0.2 describes the CMS detector, while Section 0.3
discusses the data samples and the properties of simulated events utilized in
the analysis. Section 0.4 outlines the techniques used for event
reconstruction and Section 0.5 describes the selection criteria applied in
each analysis channel. The method used for the background estimation is
reported in Section 0.6, and systematic uncertainties are detailed in Section
0.7. Finally, Section 0.8 contains the results of the analysis, and Section
0.9 summarizes this work.

##  0.2 The CMS detector

The central feature of the CMS apparatus [40] is a superconducting solenoid of
6m internal diameter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8T. Within the solenoid
volume are a silicon pixel and strip tracker, a lead tungstate crystal
electromagnetic calorimeter (ECAL), and a brass and scintillator hadron
calorimeter (HCAL), each composed of a barrel and two endcap sections. Forward
calorimeters extend the pseudorapidity ($\eta$) coverage provided by the
barrel and endcap detectors. Electron momenta are estimated by combining the
energy measurement in the ECAL with the momentum measurement in the tracker.
Muons are measured in gas-ionization detectors embedded in the steel flux-
return yoke outside the solenoid. A more detailed description of the CMS
detector, together with a definition of the coordinate system used and the
relevant kinematic variables, can be found in Ref. [40].

Events of interest are selected using a two-tiered trigger system [41], where
the first level is composed of custom hardware processors and selects events
at a rate of around 100kHz within a time interval of less than 4. The second
level, known as the high-level trigger, uses a version of the full event
reconstruction software optimized for fast processing, and reduces the event
rate to around 1kHz before data storage.

##  0.3 Data sample and simulated events

The search for $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$s presented here uses $\Pp\Pp$ collisions at
$\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$ recorded with the CMS detector in 2016. The data sample
corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 [42].

The leading order (LO) Monte Carlo (MC) program 8.205 [43] is used to simulate
the $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ pair production signal process. Both $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$s
are required to decay into a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton, and polarization
effects from the chiralities of the top quark and the $\tau$ lepton have been
neglected. The signal samples are generated for $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ masses
ranging from 200 to 2000.

The principal background processes, top quark pair production () via the
strong interaction and electroweak single top quark production in the
$t$-channel and tW processes, are simulated with the NLO generator (v1 is used
for the single top processes and v2 for the single top $t$-channel and
processes) [44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49]. The $s$-channel process of single top
quark production is generated at NLO using the program (v2.2.2) [50]. Other
background processes involve and boson production in association with jet
radiation. These processes are generated with (v2.2.2), with boson production
at NLO and boson production at LO level. The matrix element generation of and
boson production is matched to the parton shower emissions with the Frederix
and Frixione [51] and MLM [52] algorithms, respectively. Background processes
from QCD multijet production are simulated with 8.205. For all generated
events, 8.205 is used for the description of the parton shower and
hadronization. In the parton shower, the underlying event tune CUETP8M1 [53,
54] has been applied for all samples except for and single top quark
production in the $t$-channel, which use the underlying event tune CUETP8M2T4
[53, 54]. The event generation is performed using the NNPDF 3.0 parton
distribution functions (PDFs) [55], for all events. The detector response is
modeled with the [56] suite of programs.

##  0.4 Event reconstruction

Event reconstruction is based on the CMS particle-flow (PF) algorithm [57],
which combines information from all subdetectors, including measurements from
the tracking system, energy deposits in the ECAL and HCAL, and tracks
reconstructed in the muon detectors. Based on this information, all particles
in the event are reconstructed as electrons, muons, photons, charged hadrons,
or neutral hadrons.

Interaction vertices are reconstructed using a deterministic annealing
filtering algorithm [58, 59]. The reconstructed vertex with the largest value
of summed physics-objects $\pt^{2}$ is taken to be the primary $\Pp\Pp$
interaction vertex. The physics objects are jets, clustered using the jet
finding algorithm [60, 61] with the tracks assigned to the vertex as inputs,
and the associated missing transverse momentum, taken as the negative vector
sum of the of those jets. Charged particles associated with other interaction
vertices are removed from further consideration.

Muons are reconstructed using the information collected in the muon detectors
and the inner tracking detectors, and are measured in the range
$\abs{\eta}<2.4$. Tracks associated with muon candidates must be consistent
with muons originating from the primary vertex, and are required to satisfy a
set of identification requirements. Matching muon detector information to
tracks measured in the silicon tracker results in a resolution for muons with
$20<\pt<100\GeV$ of 1.3–2.0% in the barrel and better than 6% in the endcaps.
The resolution in the barrel is better than 10% for muons with up to 1 [62].

Electron candidates are reconstructed in the range $\abs{\eta}<2.5$ by
combining tracking information with energy deposits in the ECAL. Candidates
are identified [63] using information on the spatial distribution of the
shower, the track quality and the spatial match between the track and
electromagnetic cluster, the fraction of total cluster energy in the HCAL, and
the level of activity in the surrounding tracker and calorimeter regions. The
transverse momentum resolution for electrons with $\pt\approx 45\GeV$ from
$\Z\to\Pe\Pe$ decays ranges from 1.7% for nonshowering electrons in the barrel
region to 4.5% for electrons showering in the endcaps [63].

Jets are clustered using PF candidates as inputs to the anti-algorithm [60] in
the 3.0 software package [61], using a distance parameter of 0.4. For all
jets, corrections based on the jet area [64] are applied to the energy of the
jets to remove the energy contributions from neutral hadrons from additional
pp interactions in the same or adjacent bunch crossings (pileup collisions).
Subsequent corrections are used to account for the nonlinear calorimetric
response in both jet energy and mass, as a function of $\eta$ and $\pt$ [65].
The jet energy resolution amounts typically to 15% at 10, 8% at 100, and 4% at
1 [66]. Corrections to the jet energy scale and the jet energy resolution are
propagated to the determination of the missing transverse momentum [66]. Jets
associated with quarks are identified using the combined secondary vertex v2
algorithm [67, 68]. The working point used for jet tagging in this analysis
has an efficiency of $\approx$65% (in simulated events) and a mistag rate (the
rate at which light-flavor jets are incorrectly tagged) of approximately 1%
[68].

Hadronically decaying $\tau$ leptons are reconstructed with the hadron-plus-
strips (HPS) algorithm [69] and are denoted by $\tauh$. The HPS algorithm is
based on PF jets and additionally includes photons originating from neutral
pion decays. Energy depositions in the ECAL are reconstructed in ”strips”
elongated in the direction of the azimuthal angle $\phi$, to take account of
interactions in the material of the detector and the axial magnetic field.
These deposits are associated with one or three charged tracks to reconstruct
various hadronic decay modes of $\tau$ leptons. To suppress backgrounds from
light-quark or gluon jets, a $\tauh$ candidate is required to be isolated from
other energy deposits in the event. The isolation criterion is based on the
scalar $\pt$ sum $I_{\tau}$ of charged and neutral PF candidates within a cone
of radius $\smash[b]{\sqrt{(\Delta\eta)^{2}+(\Delta\phi)^{2}}=0.5}$ around the
$\tauh$ direction, excluding the $\tauh$ candidate. The isolation criterion is
$I_{\tau}<1.5\GeV$ [70].

The energies and resolutions as well as the selection efficiencies for all
reconstructed jets and leptons are studied in data and simulated events [62,
63, 66, 68, 70]. Based on these studies, the simulation is corrected to match
the data.

##  0.5 Event selection and categorization

In the online trigger system, events with an isolated muon (or electron) with
$\pt>24\,(27)\GeV$ and $\abs{\eta}<2.4\,(2.1)$ are selected in the muon
(electron) channel. We select events offline containing exactly one isolated
muon (or electron) with $\pt>30\GeV$ and $\abs{\eta}<2.4\,(2.1)$. For the
electron channel, a veto is applied to events with a muon to avoid overlap
between the two channels. At least one $\tauh$ lepton with $\pt>20\GeV$ and
$\abs{\eta}<2.1$ and at least two jets with $\pt>50\GeV$ and $\abs{\eta}<2.4$
are required. Events are selected if a third jet with $\pt>30\GeV$ and
$\abs{\eta}<2.4$ is present, and any additional jets are only considered if
they have ${\pt>30\GeV}$. The magnitude of the missing transverse momentum, ,
is required to be above 50. Further, the events are divided into two
categories corresponding to the number of observed LQ candidates, allowing the
sensitivity to be enhanced over a broad range of LQ masses. The event
selection was chosen to maximize the expected significance of a possible LQ
signal. A summary of the selection criteria for both categories is given in
Table 0.5 and described below.

Summary of selection criteria in event categories A ($\ell\tauh$ \+ jets) and
B ($\ell\tauh\tauh$ \+ jets), where $\ell=\mu,\Pe$. In category A, the two
subcategories, OS and SS, are defined by the charge of the $\ell\tau_{h}$
pair. The fit variable used in each category is also shown.  Category A
Category B OS $\ell\tauh$ \+ jets SS $\ell\tauh$ \+ jets OS
$\ell\tau_{h}\tau_{h}$ \+ jets Jet selection $\geq$4 jets $\geq$3 jets $\geq$3
jets selection $\ptmiss>100\GeV$ $\ptmiss>50\GeV$ $\ptmiss>50\GeV$ selection
$\pt>100\GeV$ $\pt^{\tau 1}>65\GeV$, $\pt^{\tau 2}>35\GeV$ tagging $\geq$1
$\cPqb$ tag — $S_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection — $S_{\mathrm{T}}>350\GeV$ Fit
variable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ in two $S_{\mathrm{T}}$ bins number of
events

###  0.5.1 Category A: $\ell\tauh$ \+ jets

In this category, exactly one $\tauh$ lepton is required in addition to the
presence of one electron or muon. High requirements are applied to maximize
the sensitivity at high LQ masses. The leading jet is required to have
${\pt>150\GeV}$. In addition we define two subcategories based on the electric
charges of the particles in the $\ell\tauh$ pair: opposite-sign (OS) and same-
sign (SS). Events passing the OS $\ell\tauh$ pair requirement must contain at
least four jets and have $\ptmiss>100\GeV$. For both subcategories, we require
that the leading tau lepton has $\pt>100\GeV$ and that there is at least one
$\cPqb$-tagged jet. Finally the events are divided into two regions of
$S_{\mathrm{T}}$, where $S_{\mathrm{T}}$ is the scalar $\pt$ sum of all
selected jets, leptons, and $\ptmiss$. In the low (high)-$S_{\mathrm{T}}$
search regions, events must satisfy $S_{\mathrm{T}}<1200\,(\geq 1200)\GeV$.
This division adds sensitivity for $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ masses of 600and higher.

The top quarks originating from the decay of a heavy $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ are
expected to be produced with larger $\pt$ than the top quarks produced in
background processes. Therefore, the transverse momentum distribution of the
top quark candidate decaying into hadronic jets ($p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$)
gives discrimination power between background and signal events, and a
measurement of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ spectrum is performed in category
A.

A kinematic reconstruction of the top quark candidate is performed by building
top quark hypotheses using between one and five jets. Because of the presence
of multiple hypotheses in each event, we choose the hypothesis in which the
reconstructed top quark mass is closest to the value of 172.5.

The statistical evaluation in this category is performed through a template-
based fit to the measured $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ distribution.

###  0.5.2 Category B: $\ell\tauh\tauh$ \+ jets

In this category events are required to have at least two leptons and one
electron or muon. This requirement of two leptons removes a large fraction of
the SM background processes. The exception to this exclusion of SM backgrounds
are diboson production events that contain one or more leptons, but the cross
sections for these processes are small. The selection criteria in this
category are adapted to provide good sensitivity for low LQ masses.

Each event is required to contain an OS $\tauh\tauh$ pair. If the event
contains more than one $\tauh\tauh$ pair, the OS pair with the largest scalar
sum is selected. Moreover, the leading and subleading $\tauh$ must satisfy
$\pt>65\GeV$ and $35\GeV$, respectively.

In this category a counting experiment is performed, as the number of expected
background events is too small for results to benefit from a shape-based
analysis.

##  0.6 Background estimation

The background in this analysis consists of samples of events that are
selected because of jets misidentified as $\tauh$ leptons and events with one
electron or muon together with one or more leptons.

In the following, events from $\ttbar$ and +jets production that contain at
least one misidentified $\tauh$ lepton are obtained from control regions (CRs)
separately defined for the two search regions (SRs) A and B. We consider the
following contributions: the $\ttbar$ background that consists of only
misidentified $\tauh$ leptons (or exactly one misidentified $\tauh$ lepton as
in category A), denoted by $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$, the $\ttbar$ background that
consists of (at least) one $\tauh$ lepton and (at least) one misidentified
$\tauh$ lepton (only used in category B), denoted by $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$,
and the $\ttbar$ background that consists of one $\tauh$ lepton, denoted by
$\ttbar_{\mathrm{p}}$.

An extrapolation method is used to derive the background due to misidentified
$\tauh$ leptons. The normalization, and in category A also the shape, of the
$\ttbar$ background is estimated using

$N^{\ttbar\text{,\,data}}_{\text{SR}}=\left(N^{\text{data}}_{\text{CR}}-N^{\text{other,\,MC}}_{\text{CR}}\right)\,\frac{N^{\ttbar\text{,\,MC}}_{\text{SR}}}{N^{\ttbar\text{,\,MC}}_{\text{CR}}},$
(1)

where $N$ is the total number of events for the respective process in the
signal region or control region and where “other” denotes all non-background
processes that are estimated from simulation. The contribution to the
background from events with $\tauh$ leptons only is estimated from simulated
events.

###  0.6.1 Backgrounds in category A

In each subcategory of category A, the largest fraction of background events
originates from $\ttbar$ production. The second largest source of background
events arises from +jets production, while minor contributions come from
single top quark and +jets production.

The $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ background and the +jets background that contain a
misidentified $\tauh$ lepton are derived from a single control region
($\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{A}}$), which is defined through the same selection
requirements as for the SR, but with an inverted isolation requirement for the
$\tauh$ lepton.

The shape of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ distribution is compared between the
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{A}}$ and SR in simulated and +jets events. Since the
inversion of the isolation criterion introduces kinematic differences between
the SRs and CRs, the jet multiplicity and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ are
corrected in order to reproduce the shape of the and +jets backgrounds in the
SRs [71], as shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 2: Shape comparison between the category A signal region and the
corresponding control region, as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$, for
simulated and +jets events. Events with an opposite-sign $\mu\tauh$ pair are
shown on the left, while those with a same-sign $\mu\tauh$ pair are shown on
the right. The full selection is applied and the $S_{\mathrm{T}}$ categories
are combined. All histograms are normalized to the total number of entries.
Uncertainties of the signal region and control region are indicated by red
error bars and gray hatched areas, respectively. The gray band in the ratio
plot corresponds to the statistical uncertainty in the simulated samples.

Once the kinematic distributions in the $\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{A}}$ are
corrected, we use Eq. (1) to extrapolate the and +jets background yields to
the SR. In this equation, we replace $N^{\ttbar}$ with
$N^{\ttbar,\,\text{\PW+jets}}$ for category A.

###  0.6.2 Backgrounds in category B

Figure 3: Strategy for the background estimation in category B. The
$\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ background in the signal region is derived from the
control region $\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B1}}$. The $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$
background in the signal region is derived from the control region
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B2}}$. To obtain an estimate of the
$\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ background in the control region
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B2}}$, the control region $\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B1}}$ is
used.

In category B, the dominant background also originates from $\ttbar$
production. As the fraction of misidentified electrons and muons was found to
be negligible in this analysis, at least one of the two $\tauh$ leptons is
mimicked by a jet. Thus, background events from $\ttbar$ production consist
either of only misidentified $\tauh$ leptons or one $\tauh$ lepton and one
misidentified $\tauh$ lepton, plus an electron or a muon. A separate CR is
defined for each component. The strategy for determining this background in
category B is shown in Fig. 3.

The first control region ($\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B1}}$) is defined by inverting
the isolation criterion for all $\tauh$ leptons with respect to the isolation
criterion applied in the SR. The region $\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B1}}$ is used to
extrapolate the $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ background to the SR. In contrast to the
SR, the charge criterion on the $\tauh$ lepton is removed and the leading
$\tauh$ lepton must have $\pt<100\GeV$ to avoid overlap between the control
region $\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B1}}$ and control region
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{A}}$. The $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ background normalization
is then derived as in Eq. (1).

A second control region ($\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B2}}$) to estimate the
$\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$ background is defined, in which at least one isolated
and at least one nonisolated $\tauh$ lepton are required. In contrast to the
SR, the charge criterion on the $\tauh$ lepton is removed and the leading
$\tauh$ lepton must have $\pt<45\GeV$. The event must have an opposite-sign
$\ell\tauh$ pair. For this requirement, the pair with the largest summed is
chosen. In addition, the events must satisfy
$M_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell,\ptmiss)>100\GeV$, where $M_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell,\ptmiss)$
is the transverse mass of the lepton-$\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\,\text{miss}}$
system and defined as

$\smash[b]{M_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell,\ptmiss)=\sqrt{2\pt^{\ell}\ptmiss\left(1-\cos[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\,\ell},\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\,\text{miss}})]\right)}}.$

The largest non-$\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$ fraction in control region
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B2}}$ arises from the $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ events. The
estimate of this background is derived from the control region
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B1}}$ and extrapolated to the control region
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B2}}$ by using the extrapolation method as in Eq. (1).
Once the $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ background is estimated from
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B1}}$, it is subtracted from
$\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{B2}}$. The $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$ background is
extrapolated to the SR by using the extrapolation method as in Eq. (1).

##  0.7 Systematic uncertainties

Systematic uncertainties can affect both the overall normalization of
background components, and the shapes of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$
distributions for signal and background processes. Uncertainties in the MC
simulation are applied to all simulated events used in the signal and in the
various control regions. For each systematic uncertainty, the background
estimation procedure described in Section 0.6 is repeated to study the impact
of the respective systematic variation on the final result of the analysis. In
the following, the systematic uncertainties applied to the analysis are
summarized.

  * •

The uncertainty in the integrated luminosity measurement recorded with the CMS
detector in the 2016 run at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$ is 2.5% [42].

  * •

The following uncertainties in the normalization of the background processes
are included:

    * –

5.6% in the $\ttbar$ production cross section [72] for $\ttbar$ events that
include $\tau$ leptons,

    * –

10% for single top quark [73, 74, 75], W+jets, and Z+jets production [76],

    * –

20% for diboson production [77, 78, 79].

  * •

The estimation of pileup effects is based on the total inelastic cross
section. This cross section is determined to be 69.2mb. The uncertainty is
taken into account by varying the total inelastic cross section by 5% [80].

  * •

Simulated events are corrected for lepton identification, trigger, and
isolation efficiencies. The corresponding scale factors are applied as
functions of $\abs{\eta}$ and $\pt$. The systematic uncertainties due to these
corrections are taken into account by varying each scale factor within its
uncertainty.

  * •

The scale factors for the jet energy scale and the jet energy resolution are
determined as functions of $\abs{\eta}$ and $\pt$ [66]. The effect of the
uncertainties in these scale factors are considered by varying the scale
factors within their uncertainties. These variations are propagated to the
measurement of the .

  * •

Scale factors for the tagging efficiencies are applied. These scale factors
are measured as a function of the jet $\pt$ [68]. The corresponding
uncertainty is taken into account by varying the scale factors within their
uncertainties.

  * •

Various uncertainties in the $\tau$ lepton reconstruction are considered. An
uncertainty of 5% in the $\tau$ lepton identification is applied, with an
additional uncertainty of $0.2\,\pt/(1\TeV)$. An uncertainty of 3% in the
$\tau$ lepton energy scale is taken into account, and an uncertainty in the
charge misidentification rate of 2% is applied [70].

  * •

Parton distribution functions from the NNPDF 3.0 set are used to generate
simulated events for both background and signal samples. The uncertainties in
the PDFs are determined according to the procedure described in Ref. [81]. The
associated PDF uncertainties in the signal acceptance are estimated following
the prescription for the LHC [81].

  * •

We consider uncertainties in the renormalization ($\mu_{\mathrm{R}}$) and
factorization ($\mu_{\mathrm{F}}$) scales by varying the respective scales,
both simultaneously and independently, by factors between 0.5 and 2.

  * •

We apply an uncertainty in the background estimation method by varying the
extrapolation factors for background processes without $\tau$ leptons within
their uncertainties. An additional uncertainty due to the correction factors
used to reweight events in control region $\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{A}}$ is
applied.

The systematic uncertainties with the largest effects on the most important
background processes and on the signal are summarized in Table 0.7. The most
important background processes are the $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$,
$\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ and +jets, and $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$ backgrounds
derived from data, and the $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p}}$ background taken from
simulation. Also shown is the systematic uncertainty associated with the
signal produced by an $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ whose mass is 700. The impact of the
different sources of uncertainty varies for different processes. The
uncertainty due to the variation in the scales $\mu_{\mathrm{R}}$ and
$\mu_{\mathrm{F}}$ has a large impact on the $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p}}$ background,
and is derived from simulation. The uncertainty in the $\tau$ lepton
identification has the largest effect on the signal sample. For the
backgrounds derived from several CRs, the uncertainty in the extrapolation
factor has the largest impact.

Summary of largest systematic uncertainties for the $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ (and
+jets) and $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$ backgrounds derived from data, for the
$\ttbar_{\mathrm{p}}$ background obtained from simulation and for a leptoquark
signal with a mass of 700. Shown are the ranges of uncertainties, which are
dependent on the search regions and the lepton channel type.  Category A
Category B Uncertainty $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p}}$ $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ \+ +jets
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ $\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ $\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ Scales ($\mu_{\mathrm{F}}$, $\mu_{\mathrm{R}}$) 26–42% 1–7%
— 5–7% 2–6% — $\tau$ ID 8–9% 0–1% 9–11% 0% 5–6% 18–20% Bkg. estimate — 6–18% —
26–30% 30–38% —

##  0.8 Results

The results of all search categories in the electron and muon channels are
combined in a binned-likelihood fit. A statistical template-based analysis,
using the measured $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ distributions in category A and a
counting experiment with the events measured in category B, is performed by
using the Theta software package [82]. Each systematic uncertainty discussed
in Sec. 0.7 is accounted for by a nuisance parameter in the likelihood
formation.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ distributions in the electron and muon
channels in category A are shown in Figs. 4 and 5, respectively. Contributions
from and +jets production with a misidentified lepton are derived from control
region $\mathrm{CR}_{\mathrm{A}}$, whereas SM backgrounds with a lepton and
other small backgrounds are taken from simulation.

Figure 4: Distributions of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ for events in the electron
channel passing the full selection in category A. The events are separated
into OS (upper), SS (lower), low $S_{\mathrm{T}}$ (left) and high
$S_{\mathrm{T}}$ (right) categories. The hatched areas represent the total
uncertainties of the SM background. In the bottom panel, the ratio of data to
SM background is shown together with statistical (dark gray) and total (light
gray) uncertainties of the total SM background.

Figure 5: Distributions of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ for events in the muon
channel passing the full selection in category A. The events are separated
into OS (upper), SS (lower), low $S_{\mathrm{T}}$ (left) and high
$S_{\mathrm{T}}$ (right) categories. The hatched areas represent the total
uncertainties of the SM background. In the bottom panel, the ratio of data to
SM background is shown together with statistical (dark gray) and total (light
gray) uncertainties of the total SM background.

Final event yield in category B in the muon and electron channels for
different leptoquark mass hypotheses, the background processes, and data. The
total uncertainties for the signal and the background processes are shown.
Process $\Pe\tauh\tauh$ \+ jets $\mu\tauh\tauh$ \+ jets $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$
(300) $\qquad 97$ ${}^{+25}_{-24}$ $\qquad 167$ ${}^{+36}_{-37}$
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ (400) $73$ ${}^{+14}_{-13}$ $98$ ${}^{+19}_{-17}$
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ (500) $34.1$ ${}^{+6.6}_{-6.2}$ $44.9$ ${}^{+8.5}_{-7.9}$
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ (600) $14.1$ ${}^{+2.8}_{-2.7}$ $21.1$ ${}^{+4.1}_{-3.8}$
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ (700) $7.3$ ${}^{+1.5}_{-1.4}$ $7.1$ ${}^{+1.5}_{-1.4}$
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ (800) $3.2$ ${}^{+0.7}_{-0.7}$ $4.4$ ${}^{+1.0}_{-0.9}$
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ (900) $1.5$ ${}^{+0.4}_{-0.3}$ $1.9$ ${}^{+0.4}_{-0.4}$
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ (1000) $0.8$ ${}^{+0.2}_{-0.2}$ $0.9$ ${}^{+0.2}_{-0.2}$
$\ttbar_{\mathrm{f}}$ $2.5$ ${}^{+0.8}_{-1.2}$ $3.2$ ${}^{+1.5}_{-1.2}$
$\ttbar_{\mathrm{p+f}}$ $1.5$ ${}^{+0.8}_{-0.8}$ $2.0$ ${}^{+0.8}_{-0.9}$
Single t $0.3$ ${}^{+0.3}_{-0.3}$ $0.0$ ${}^{+0.2}_{-0.0}$ W+jets $0.5$
${}^{+1.2}_{-0.5}$ $0.4$ ${}^{+0.7}_{-0.4}$ Z+jets $1.4$ ${}^{+0.5}_{-0.5}$
$1.0$ ${}^{+0.4}_{-0.4}$ Diboson $1.6$ ${}^{+1.7}_{-1.6}$ $1.7$
${}^{+1.8}_{-1.7}$ Total background $7.9$ ${}^{+2.4}_{-2.5}$ $8.4$
${}^{+2.6}_{-2.3}$ Data 9 11

In Table 0.8, the total number of events from background processes and signal
processes in category B is summarized. No significant deviation from the SM
prediction is observed in the data in either category A or category B.

A Bayesian statistical method [82, 83] is used to derive 95% confidence level
(CL) upper limits on the product of the cross section and the branching
fraction squared for $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ pair production. Pseudo-experiments are
performed to extract expected limits under a background-only hypothesis. For
the signal cross section parameter, we use a uniform prior distribution. For
the nuisance parameters, log-normal prior distributions are used. These are
randomly varied within their ranges of validity to estimate the 68 and 95% CL
expected limits. Correlations between the systematic uncertainties across all
channels are taken into account. The statistical uncertainties of simulated
samples are treated as an additional Poisson nuisance parameter in each bin of
the $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\cPqt}$ distribution.

The 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section and the branching
fraction squared $\mathcal{B}^{2}$ as a function of $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ mass and
the 95% CL upper limits on the $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ mass as a function of
$\mathcal{B}$ are shown in Fig. 6 (left). The cross section for pair
production of scalar LQs at NLO accuracy [24] is shown as the dashed line. The
dotted lines indicate the uncertainty due to the PDFs and to variations of the
renormalization and factorization scales by factors of 0.5 and 2.

Production cross sections of 0.6pb for $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ masses of 300and of
about 0.01pb for masses up to 1.5are excluded at 95% CL under the assumption
of $\mathcal{B}=1$ for $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ decays to a top quark and $\tau$
lepton. Comparing these limits with the NLO cross sections, $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$
masses up to 900(930expected) can be excluded.

Exclusion limits with varying branching fractions $\mathcal{B}$ are presented
in Fig. 6 (right), where limits on the complementary
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}\to\PQb\nu$ ($\mathcal{B}=0$) decay channel are also included.
The results for $\mathcal{B}=0$ are obtained from a search for pair-produced
bottom squarks [38] with subsequent decays into $\PQb$ quark and neutralino
pairs, in the limit of vanishing neutralino masses. Scalar $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$s
can be excluded for masses below 1150for $\mathcal{B}=0$ and for masses below
700over the full $\mathcal{B}$ range. For the assumptions of a LQ with
symmetric couplings under the SM gauge symmetry and with decays to only
$\PQb\nu$ and $\cPqt\tau$, $\mathcal{B}$ can only take values of 1 or 0.5.
When these assumptions are lifted, $\mathcal{B}$ can take all possible values
between 0 and 1. Note that if upper limits on $\mathcal{B}$ are to be used to
constrain the lepton-quark-$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ Yukawa couplings,
$\lambda_{\PQb\nu}$ and $\lambda_{\PQt\tau}$, kinematic suppression factors
that favor $\PQb\nu$ decay over the $\PQt\tau$ decay have to be considered as
well [26, 27].

The results presented here can be directly reinterpreted in the context of
pair produced down-type squarks decaying into top quark and $\tau$ lepton
pairs. Such squarks appear in RPV SUSY scenarios and correspond to LQs with
$\mathcal{B}=0.5$. These squarks are excluded up to a mass of 810, and the
decay mode is dominated by the RPV coupling $\lambda^{\prime}_{333}$ [84].

Figure 6: Upper limits at 95% confidence level on the product of the cross
section and the branching fraction squared (left), and on the leptoquark mass
as a function of the branching fraction (right), for the pair production of
scalar LQs decaying to a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton. In the left plot, the
theoretical curve corresponds to the NLO cross section with uncertainties from
PDF and scale variations [24], shown by the dotted lines. The right plot
additionally includes results from a search for pair-produced bottom squarks
[38].

##  0.9 Summary

A search has been conducted for pair production of third-generation scalar
leptoquarks ($\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$s) decaying into a top quark and a $\tau$
lepton. Proton-proton collision data recorded in 2016 at a center-of-mass
energy of 13, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9, has been
analyzed. The search has been carried out in the $\ell\tauh$+jets and
$\ell\tauh\tauh$+jets channels, where $\ell$ is either an electron or muon and
$\tauh$ indicates a tau lepton decaying to hadrons. Standard model backgrounds
due to misidentified leptons are derived from control regions. The measured
transverse momentum distributions for the reconstructed top quark candidate
are analyzed in four search regions in the $\ell\tauh$+jets channel. The
observed number of events are found to be in agreement with the background
predictions.

Upper limits on the production cross section of $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$ pairs are
set between 0.6 and 0.01pb at 95% confidence level for $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$
masses between 300 and 1700, assuming a branching fraction of $\mathcal{B}=1$.
The scalar $\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$s are excluded with masses below 900, for
$\mathcal{B}=1$. This result represents the most stringent limits to date on
$\mathrm{LQ}_{3}$s coupled to $\tau$ leptons and top quarks and constrains
models explaining flavor anomalies in the quark sector through contributions
from scalar LQs.

###### Acknowledgements.

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 centers 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);
SENESCYT (Ecuador); 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); NKFIA (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran);
SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); MSIP and NRF (Republic of Korea); LAS
(Lithuania); MOE and UM (Malaysia); BUAP, CINVESTAV, CONACYT, LNS, SEP, and
UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MBIE (New Zealand); PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC
(Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Dubna); MON, RosAtom, RAS, RFBR and RAEP
(Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI, CPAN, PCTI and FEDER (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 program and the European Research Council and Horizon 2020 Grant,
contract No. 675440 (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 F.R.S.-FNRS and FWO (Belgium)
under the “Excellence of Science - EOS” - be.h project n. 30820817; the
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic; the
Lendület (”Momentum”) Program and the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the
Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the New National Excellence Program ÚNKP, the
NKFIA research grants 123842, 123959, 124845, 124850 and 125105 (Hungary); the
Council of Science and Industrial Research, India; the HOMING PLUS program of
the Foundation for Polish Science, cofinanced from European Union, Regional
Development Fund, the Mobility Plus program of the Ministry of Science and
Higher Education, the National Science Center (Poland), contracts Harmonia
2014/14/M/ST2/00428, Opus 2014/13/B/ST2/02543, 2014/15/B/ST2/03998, and
2015/19/B/ST2/02861, Sonata-bis 2012/07/E/ST2/01406; the National Priorities
Research Program by Qatar National Research Fund; the Programa Estatal de
Fomento de la Investigación Científica y Técnica de Excelencia María de
Maeztu, grant MDM-2015-0509 and the Programa Severo Ochoa del Principado de
Asturias; the Thalis and Aristeia programs cofinanced by EU-ESF and the Greek
NSRF; the Rachadapisek Sompot Fund for Postdoctoral Fellowship, Chulalongkorn
University and the Chulalongkorn Academic into Its 2nd Century Project
Advancement Project (Thailand); the Welch Foundation, contract C-1845; and the
Weston Havens Foundation (USA).

## References

  * [1] W. Buchmüller, R. Rückl, and D. Wyler, “Leptoquarks in lepton-quark collisions”,  Phys. Lett. B 191 (1987) 442, 10.1016/0370-2693(87)90637-X. [Erratum: 10.1016/S0370-2693(99)00014-3].
  * [2] J. C. Pati and A. Salam, “Lepton number as the fourth color”,  Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974) 275, 10.1103/PhysRevD.10.275. [Erratum: 10.1103/PhysRevD.11.703.2].
  * [3] H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, “Unity of all elementary particle forces”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 32 (1974) 438, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.32.438.
  * [4] H. Fritzsch and P. Minkowski, “Unified interactions of leptons and hadrons”,  Ann. Phys. 93 (1975) 193, 10.1016/0003-4916(75)90211-0.
  * [5] E. Farhi and L. Susskind, “Technicolor”,  Phys. Rept. 74 (1981) 277, 10.1016/0370-1573(81)90173-3.
  * [6] K. D. Lane and M. V. Ramana, “Walking technicolor signatures at hadron colliders”,  Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991) 2678, 10.1103/PhysRevD.44.2678.
  * [7] B. Schrempp and F. Schrempp, “Light leptoquarks”,  Phys. Lett. B 153 (1985) 101, 10.1016/0370-2693(85)91450-9.
  * [8] B. Gripaios, “Composite leptoquarks at the LHC”,  JHEP 02 (2010) 045, 10.1007/JHEP02(2010)045, arXiv:0910.1789.
  * [9] G. R. Farrar and P. Fayet, “Phenomenology of the production, decay, and detection of new hadronic states associated with supersymmetry”,  Phys. Lett. B 76 (1978) 575, 10.1016/0370-2693(78)90858-4.
  * [10] R. Barbier et al., “R-parity violating supersymmetry”,  Phys. Rept. 420 (2005) 1, 10.1016/j.physrep.2005.08.006, arXiv:hep-ph/0406039.
  * [11] BaBar Collaboration, “Evidence for an excess of $\bar{B}\to D^{(*)}\tau^{-}\bar{\nu}_{\tau}$ decays”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 101802, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.101802, arXiv:1205.5442.
  * [12] BaBar Collaboration, “Measurement of an excess of $\bar{B}\to D^{(*)}\tau^{-}\bar{\nu}_{\tau}$ decays and implications for charged Higgs bosons”,  Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 072012, 10.1103/PhysRevD.88.072012, arXiv:1303.0571.
  * [13] Belle Collaboration, “Observation of $B^{0}\to D^{*-}\tau^{+}\nu_{\tau}$ decay at Belle”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 191807, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.191807, arXiv:0706.4429.
  * [14] Belle Collaboration, “Observation of $B^{+}\to\bar{D}^{*0}\tau^{+}\nu_{\tau}$ and evidence for $B^{+}\to\bar{D}^{0}\tau^{+}\nu_{\tau}$ at Belle”,  Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 072005, 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.072005, arXiv:1005.2302.
  * [15] Belle Collaboration, “Measurement of the branching ratio of $\bar{B}\to D^{(\ast)}\tau^{-}\bar{\nu}_{\tau}$ relative to $\bar{B}\to D^{(\ast)}\ell^{-}\bar{\nu}_{\ell}$ decays with hadronic tagging at Belle”,  Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 072014, 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.072014, arXiv:1507.03233.
  * [16] LHCb Collaboration, “Measurement of the ratio of branching fractions $\mathcal{B}(\bar{B}^{0}\to D^{*+}\tau^{-}\bar{\nu}_{\tau})/\mathcal{B}(\bar{B}^{0}\to D^{*+}\mu^{-}\bar{\nu}_{\mu})$”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 111803, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.159901, arXiv:1506.08614. [Erratum: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.111803].
  * [17] B. Dumont, K. Nishiwaki, and R. Watanabe, “LHC constraints and prospects for $S_{1}$ scalar leptoquark explaining the $\bar{B}\to D^{(*)}\tau\bar{\nu}$ anomaly”,  Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 034001, 10.1103/PhysRevD.94.034001, arXiv:1603.05248.
  * [18] M. Tanaka and R. Watanabe, “New physics in the weak interaction of $\bar{B}\to D^{(*)}\tau\bar{\nu}$”,  Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 034028, 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.034028, arXiv:1212.1878.
  * [19] Y. Sakaki, M. Tanaka, A. Tayduganov, and R. Watanabe, “Testing leptoquark models in $\bar{B}\to D^{(*)}\tau\bar{\nu}$”,  Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 094012, 10.1103/PhysRevD.88.094012, arXiv:1309.0301.
  * [20] I. Doršner, S. Fajfer, N. Košnik, and I. Nišandžić, “Minimally flavored colored scalar in $\bar{B}\to D^{(*)}\tau\bar{\nu}$ and the mass matrices constraints”,  JHEP 11 (2013) 084, 10.1007/JHEP11(2013)084, arXiv:1306.6493.
  * [21] B. Gripaios, M. Nardecchia, and S. A. Renner, “Composite leptoquarks and anomalies in $B$-meson decays”,  JHEP 05 (2015) 006, 10.1007/JHEP05(2015)006, arXiv:1412.1791.
  * [22] S. Chakdar, T. Li, S. Nandi, and S. K. Rai, “Unity of elementary particles and forces for the third family”,  Phys. Lett. B 718 (2012) 121, 10.1016/j.physletb.2012.10.021, arXiv:1206.0409.
  * [23] S. Chakdar, T. Li, S. Nandi, and S. K. Rai, “Top SU(5) models: Baryon and lepton number violating resonances at the LHC”,  Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 096002, 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.096002, arXiv:1302.6942.
  * [24] M. Krämer, T. Plehn, M. Spira, and P. M. Zerwas, “Pair production of scalar leptoquarks at the CERN LHC”,  Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 057503, 10.1103/PhysRevD.71.057503, arXiv:hep-ph/0411038.
  * [25] CMS Collaboration, “Search for third-generation scalar leptoquarks in the t$\tau$ channel in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV”,  JHEP 07 (2015) 042, 10.1007/JHEP07(2015)042, arXiv:1503.09049. [Erratum: 10.1007/JHEP11(2016)056].
  * [26] D0 Collaboration, “Search for third-generation leptoquarks in $p\bar{p}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=1.96$ TeV”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 061801, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.061801, arXiv:0705.0812.
  * [27] CDF Collaboration, “Search for third generation vector leptoquarks in $p\bar{p}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=1.96$ TeV”,  Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 091105, 10.1103/PhysRevD.77.091105, arXiv:0706.2832.
  * [28] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for third generation scalar leptoquarks in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV with the ATLAS detector”,  JHEP 06 (2013) 033, 10.1007/JHEP06(2013)033, arXiv:1303.0526.
  * [29] CMS Collaboration, “Search for third-generation leptoquarks and scalar bottom quarks in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”,  JHEP 12 (2012) 055, 10.1007/JHEP12(2012)055, arXiv:1210.5627.
  * [30] CMS Collaboration, “Search for pair production of third-generation scalar leptoquarks and top squarks in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 8 TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 739 (2014) 229, 10.1016/j.physletb.2014.10.063, arXiv:1408.0806.
  * [31] CMS Collaboration, “Searches for third-generation squark production in fully hadronic final states in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV”,  JHEP 06 (2015) 116, 10.1007/JHEP06(2015)116, arXiv:1503.08037.
  * [32] ATLAS Collaboration, “Searches for scalar leptoquarks in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV with the ATLAS detector”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 5, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3823-9, arXiv:1508.04735.
  * [33] ATLAS Collaboration, “Summary of the searches for squarks and gluinos using $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS experiment at the LHC”,  JHEP 10 (2015) 054, 10.1007/JHEP10(2015)054, arXiv:1507.05525.
  * [34] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for bottom squark pair production in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 547, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4382-4, arXiv:1606.08772.
  * [35] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for supersymmetry in events with $b$-tagged jets and missing transverse momentum in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector”,  JHEP 11 (2017) 195, 10.1007/JHEP11(2017)195, arXiv:1708.09266.
  * [36] CMS Collaboration, “Search for heavy neutrinos or third-generation leptoquarks in final states with two hadronically decaying $\tau$ leptons and two jets in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  JHEP 03 (2017) 077, 10.1007/JHEP03(2017)077, arXiv:1612.01190.
  * [37] CMS Collaboration, “Search for third-generation scalar leptoquarks and heavy right-handed neutrinos in final states with two tau leptons and two jets in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  JHEP 07 (2017) 121, 10.1007/JHEP07(2017)121, arXiv:1703.03995.
  * [38] CMS Collaboration, “Search for new phenomena with the $M_{\mathrm{T2}}$ variable in the all-hadronic final state produced in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 710, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5267-x, arXiv:1705.04650.
  * [39] CMS Collaboration, “Search for the pair production of third-generation squarks with two-body decays to a bottom or charm quark and a neutralino in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 778 (2018) 263, 10.1016/j.physletb.2018.01.012, arXiv:1707.07274.
  * [40] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,  JINST 3 (2008) S08004, 10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004.
  * [41] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”,  JINST 12 (2017) P01020, 10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020, arXiv:1609.02366.
  * [42] CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurements for the 2016 data taking period”, Technical Report CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001, CERN, Geneva, 2017.
  * [43] T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands, “A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1”,  Comput. Phys. Commun. 178 (2008) 852, 10.1016/j.cpc.2008.01.036, arXiv:0710.3820.
  * [44] P. Nason, “A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms”,  JHEP 11 (2004) 040, 10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/040, arXiv:hep-ph/0409146.
  * [45] S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari, “Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method”,  JHEP 11 (2007) 070, 10.1088/1126-6708/2007/11/070, arXiv:0709.2092.
  * [46] S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX”,  JHEP 06 (2010) 043, 10.1007/JHEP06(2010)043, arXiv:1002.2581.
  * [47] S. Frixione, P. Nason, and G. Ridolfi, “A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction”,  JHEP 09 (2007) 126, 10.1088/1126-6708/2007/09/126, arXiv:0707.3088.
  * [48] S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “NLO single-top production matched with shower in POWHEG: $s$\- and $t$-channel contributions”,  JHEP 09 (2009) 111, 10.1088/1126-6708/2009/09/111, arXiv:0907.4076. [Erratum: 10.1007/JHEP02(2010)011].
  * [49] E. Re, “Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1547, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1547-z, arXiv:1009.2450.
  * [50] J. Alwall et al., “The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations”,  JHEP 07 (2014) 079, 10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079, arXiv:1405.0301.
  * [51] R. Frederix and S. Frixione, “Merging meets matching in MC@NLO”,  JHEP 12 (2012) 061, 10.1007/JHEP12(2012)061, arXiv:1209.6215.
  * [52] M. L. Mangano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini, and M. Treccani, “Matching matrix elements and shower evolution for top-quark production in hadronic collisions”,  JHEP 01 (2007) 013, 10.1088/1126-6708/2007/01/013, arXiv:hep-ph/0611129.
  * [53] CMS Collaboration, “Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 155, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x, arXiv:1512.00815.
  * [54] P. Skands, S. Carrazza, and J. Rojo, “Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 Tune”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 3024, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3024-y, arXiv:1404.5630.
  * [55] NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”,  JHEP 04 (2015) 040, 10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040, arXiv:1410.8849.
  * [56] GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4—a simulation toolkit”,  Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506 (2003) 250, 10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8.
  * [57] CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector”,  JINST 12 (2017) P10003, 10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003, arXiv:1706.04965.
  * [58] R. Frühwirth and A. Strandlie, “Track fitting with ambiguities and noise: A study of elastic tracking and nonlinear filters”,  Comput. Phys. Commun. 120 (1999) 197, 10.1016/S0010-4655(99)00231-3.
  * [59] CMS Collaboration, “Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker”,  JINST 9 (2014) P10009, 10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10009, arXiv:1405.6569.
  * [60] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “The anti-jet clustering algorithm”,  JHEP 04 (2008) 063, 10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063, arXiv:0802.1189.
  * [61] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet user manual”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 1896, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2, arXiv:1111.6097.
  * [62] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”,  JINST 7 (2012) P10002, 10.1088/1748-0221/7/10/P10002, arXiv:1206.4071.
  * [63] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV”,  JINST 10 (2015) P06005, 10.1088/1748-0221/10/06/P06005, arXiv:1502.02701.
  * [64] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “The catchment area of jets”,  JHEP 04 (2008) 005, 10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/005, arXiv:0802.1188.
  * [65] CMS Collaboration, “Determination of jet energy calibration and transverse momentum resolution in CMS”,  JINST 6 (2011) P11002, 10.1088/1748-0221/6/11/P11002, arXiv:1107.4277.
  * [66] CMS Collaboration, “Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV”,  JINST 12 (2017) P02014, 10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014, arXiv:1607.03663.
  * [67] CMS Collaboration, “Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment”,  JINST 8 (2013) P04013, 10.1088/1748-0221/8/04/P04013, arXiv:1211.4462.
  * [68] CMS Collaboration, “Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV”,  JINST (2017) 10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/P05011, arXiv:1712.07158.
  * [69] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of tau-lepton reconstruction and identification in CMS”,  JINST 7 (2012) P01001, 10.1088/1748-0221/7/01/P01001, arXiv:1109.6034.
  * [70] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of reconstruction and identification of tau leptons in their decays to hadrons and tau neutrino in LHC Run-2”, Technical Report CMS-PAS-TAU-16-002, CERN, 2017.
  * [71] M. Stöver, “Search for third-generation scalar leptoquarks with the CMS experiment”.  Dissertation, University of Hamburg, 2018.  10.3204/PUBDB-2018-00997.
  * [72] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the $t\bar{t}$ production cross section using events in the e$\mu$ final state in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 172, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4718-8, arXiv:1611.04040.
  * [73] N. Kidonakis, “NNLL threshold resummation for top-pair and single-top production”,  Phys. Part. Nucl. 45 (2014) 714, 10.1134/S1063779614040091, arXiv:1210.7813.
  * [74] CMS Collaboration, “Observation of the associated production of a single top quark and a W boson in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 231802, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.231802, arXiv:1401.2942.
  * [75] CMS Collaboration, “Cross section measurement of $t$-channel single top quark production in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 772 (2017) 752, 10.1016/j.physletb.2017.07.047, arXiv:1610.00678.
  * [76] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of inclusive W and Z boson production cross sections in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 191802, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.191802, arXiv:1402.0923.
  * [77] J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, and C. Williams, “Vector boson pair production at the LHC”,  JHEP 07 (2011) 018, 10.1007/JHEP07(2011)018, arXiv:1105.0020.
  * [78] T. Gehrmann et al., “$W^{+}W^{-}$ production at hadron colliders in next-to-next-to-leading-order QCD”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 212001, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.212001, arXiv:1408.5243.
  * [79] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the WZ production cross section in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 766 (2017) 268, 10.1016/j.physletb.2017.01.011, arXiv:1607.06943.
  * [80] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 722 (2013) 5, 10.1016/j.physletb.2013.03.024, arXiv:1210.6718.
  * [81] J. Butterworth et al., “PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run-2”,  J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 023001, 10.1088/0954-3899/43/2/023001, arXiv:1510.03865.
  * [82] J. Ott, “Theta—A framework for template-based modeling and inference” (2010), http://www-ekp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/õtt/theta/theta-auto.
  * [83] A. O’Hagan and J. J. Forster, “Kendall’s advanced theory of statistics. Vol. 2B: Bayesian Inference”.  Arnold, London, 2004.
  * [84] D. Dercks et al., “R-Parity violation at the LHC”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 856, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5414-4, arXiv:1706.09418.

##  .10 The CMS Collaboration

Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia
A.M. Sirunyan, A. Tumasyan Institut für Hochenergiephysik, Wien, Austria
W. Adam, F. Ambrogi, E. Asilar, T. Bergauer, J. Brandstetter, E. Brondolin, M.
Dragicevic, J. Erö, A. Escalante Del Valle, M. Flechl, M. Friedl, R.
Frühwirth1, V.M. Ghete, J. Grossmann, J. Hrubec, M. Jeitler1, A. König, N.
Krammer, I. Krätschmer, D. Liko, T. Madlener, I. Mikulec, E. Pree, N. Rad, H.
Rohringer, J. Schieck1, R. Schöfbeck, M. Spanring, D. Spitzbart, A. Taurok, W.
Waltenberger, J. Wittmann, C.-E. Wulz1, M. Zarucki Institute for Nuclear
Problems, Minsk, Belarus
V. Chekhovsky, V. Mossolov, J. Suarez Gonzalez Universiteit Antwerpen,
Antwerpen, Belgium
E.A. De Wolf, D. Di Croce, X. Janssen, J. Lauwers, M. Pieters, M. Van De
Klundert, H. Van Haevermaet, P. Van Mechelen, N. Van Remortel Vrije
Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
S. Abu Zeid, F. Blekman, J. D’Hondt, I. De Bruyn, J. De Clercq, K. Deroover,
G. Flouris, D. Lontkovskyi, S. Lowette, I. Marchesini, S. Moortgat, L.
Moreels, Q. Python, K. Skovpen, S. Tavernier, W. Van Doninck, P. Van Mulders,
I. Van Parijs Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
D. Beghin, B. Bilin, H. Brun, B. Clerbaux, G. De Lentdecker, H. Delannoy, B.
Dorney, G. Fasanella, L. Favart, R. Goldouzian, A. Grebenyuk, A.K. Kalsi, T.
Lenzi, J. Luetic, T. Maerschalk, T. Seva, E. Starling, C. Vander Velde, P.
Vanlaer, D. Vannerom, R. Yonamine, F. Zenoni Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
T. Cornelis, D. Dobur, A. Fagot, M. Gul, I. Khvastunov2, D. Poyraz, C. Roskas,
D. Trocino, M. Tytgat, W. Verbeke, M. Vit, N. Zaganidis Université Catholique
de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
H. Bakhshiansohi, O. Bondu, S. Brochet, G. Bruno, C. Caputo, A. Caudron, P.
David, S. De Visscher, C. Delaere, M. Delcourt, B. Francois, A. Giammanco, G.
Krintiras, V. Lemaitre, A. Magitteri, A. Mertens, M. Musich, K. Piotrzkowski,
L. Quertenmont, A. Saggio, M. Vidal Marono, S. Wertz, J. Zobec Centro
Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
W.L. Aldá Júnior, F.L. Alves, G.A. Alves, L. Brito, G. Correia Silva, C.
Hensel, A. Moraes, M.E. Pol, P. Rebello Teles Universidade do Estado do Rio de
Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E. Belchior Batista Das Chagas, W. Carvalho, J. Chinellato3, E. Coelho, E.M.
Da Costa, G.G. Da Silveira4, D. De Jesus Damiao, S. Fonseca De Souza, L.M.
Huertas Guativa, H. Malbouisson, M. Medina Jaime5, M. Melo De Almeida, C. Mora
Herrera, L. Mundim, H. Nogima, L.J. Sanchez Rosas, A. Santoro, A. Sznajder, M.
Thiel, E.J. Tonelli Manganote3, F. Torres Da Silva De Araujo, A. Vilela
Pereira Universidade Estadual Paulista a, Universidade Federal do ABC b, São
Paulo, Brazil
S. Ahujaa, C.A. Bernardesa, T.R. Fernandez Perez Tomeia, E.M. Gregoresb, P.G.
Mercadanteb, S.F. Novaesa, Sandra S. Padulaa, D. Romero Abadb, J.C. Ruiz
Vargasa Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Bulgarian Academy
of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Aleksandrov, R. Hadjiiska, P. Iaydjiev, A. Marinov, M. Misheva, M. Rodozov,
M. Shopova, G. Sultanov University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Dimitrov, L. Litov, B. Pavlov, P. Petkov Beihang University, Beijing, China
W. Fang6, X. Gao6, L. Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing, China
M. Ahmad, J.G. Bian, G.M. Chen, H.S. Chen, M. Chen, Y. Chen, C.H. Jiang, D.
Leggat, H. Liao, Z. Liu, F. Romeo, S.M. Shaheen, A. Spiezia, J. Tao, C. Wang,
Z. Wang, E. Yazgan, H. Zhang, J. Zhao State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics
and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y. Ban, G. Chen, J. Li, Q. Li, S. Liu, Y. Mao, S.J. Qian, D. Wang, Z. Xu
Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Y. Wang Universidad de Los Andes, Bogota, Colombia
C. Avila, A. Cabrera, C.A. Carrillo Montoya, L.F. Chaparro Sierra, C. Florez,
C.F. González Hernández, J.D. Ruiz Alvarez, M.A. Segura Delgado University of
Split, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Naval
Architecture, Split, Croatia
B. Courbon, N. Godinovic, D. Lelas, I. Puljak, P.M. Ribeiro Cipriano, T.
Sculac University of Split, Faculty of Science, Split, Croatia
Z. Antunovic, M. Kovac Institute Rudjer Boskovic, Zagreb, Croatia
V. Brigljevic, D. Ferencek, K. Kadija, B. Mesic, A. Starodumov7, T. Susa
University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
M.W. Ather, A. Attikis, G. Mavromanolakis, J. Mousa, C. Nicolaou, F. Ptochos,
P.A. Razis, H. Rykaczewski Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
M. Finger8, M. Finger Jr.8 Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador
E. Carrera Jarrin Academy of Scientific Research and Technology of the Arab
Republic of Egypt, Egyptian Network of High Energy Physics, Cairo, Egypt
A.A. Abdelalim9,10, S. Elgammal11, A. Ellithi Kamel12 National Institute of
Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Tallinn, Estonia
S. Bhowmik, R.K. Dewanjee, M. Kadastik, L. Perrini, M. Raidal, C. Veelken
Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
P. Eerola, H. Kirschenmann, J. Pekkanen, M. Voutilainen Helsinki Institute of
Physics, Helsinki, Finland
J. Havukainen, J.K. Heikkilä, T. Järvinen, V. Karimäki, R. Kinnunen, T.
Lampén, K. Lassila-Perini, S. Laurila, S. Lehti, T. Lindén, P. Luukka, T.
Mäenpää, H. Siikonen, E. Tuominen, J. Tuominiemi Lappeenranta University of
Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland
T. Tuuva IRFU, CEA, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
M. Besancon, F. Couderc, M. Dejardin, D. Denegri, J.L. Faure, F. Ferri, S.
Ganjour, S. Ghosh, A. Givernaud, P. Gras, G. Hamel de Monchenault, P. Jarry,
C. Leloup, E. Locci, M. Machet, J. Malcles, G. Negro, J. Rander, A. Rosowsky,
M.Ö. Sahin, M. Titov Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole polytechnique,
CNRS/IN2P3, Université Paris-Saclay, Palaiseau, France
A. Abdulsalam13, C. Amendola, I. Antropov, S. Baffioni, F. Beaudette, P.
Busson, L. Cadamuro, C. Charlot, R. Granier de Cassagnac, M. Jo, I. Kucher, S.
Lisniak, A. Lobanov, J. Martin Blanco, M. Nguyen, C. Ochando, G. Ortona, P.
Paganini, P. Pigard, R. Salerno, J.B. Sauvan, Y. Sirois, A.G. Stahl Leiton, Y.
Yilmaz, A. Zabi, A. Zghiche Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC UMR 7178,
F-67000 Strasbourg, France
J.-L. Agram14, J. Andrea, D. Bloch, J.-M. Brom, M. Buttignol, E.C. Chabert, C.
Collard, E. Conte14, X. Coubez, F. Drouhin14, J.-C. Fontaine14, D. Gelé, U.
Goerlach, M. Jansová, P. Juillot, A.-C. Le Bihan, N. Tonon, P. Van Hove Centre
de Calcul de l’Institut National de Physique Nucleaire et de Physique des
Particules, CNRS/IN2P3, Villeurbanne, France
S. Gadrat Université de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS-IN2P3,
Institut de Physique Nucléaire de Lyon, Villeurbanne, France
S. Beauceron, C. Bernet, G. Boudoul, N. Chanon, R. Chierici, D. Contardo, P.
Depasse, H. El Mamouni, J. Fay, L. Finco, S. Gascon, M. Gouzevitch, G.
Grenier, B. Ille, F. Lagarde, I.B. Laktineh, H. Lattaud, M. Lethuillier, L.
Mirabito, A.L. Pequegnot, S. Perries, A. Popov15, V. Sordini, M. Vander
Donckt, S. Viret, S. Zhang Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
T. Toriashvili16 Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
Z. Tsamalaidze8 RWTH Aachen University, I. Physikalisches Institut, Aachen,
Germany
C. Autermann, L. Feld, M.K. Kiesel, K. Klein, M. Lipinski, M. Preuten, C.
Schomakers, J. Schulz, M. Teroerde, B. Wittmer, V. Zhukov15 RWTH Aachen
University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, Germany
A. Albert, D. Duchardt, M. Endres, M. Erdmann, S. Erdweg, T. Esch, R. Fischer,
A. Güth, T. Hebbeker, C. Heidemann, K. Hoepfner, S. Knutzen, M. Merschmeyer,
A. Meyer, P. Millet, S. Mukherjee, T. Pook, M. Radziej, H. Reithler, M.
Rieger, F. Scheuch, D. Teyssier, S. Thüer RWTH Aachen University, III.
Physikalisches Institut B, Aachen, Germany
G. Flügge, B. Kargoll, T. Kress, A. Künsken, T. Müller, A. Nehrkorn, A.
Nowack, C. Pistone, O. Pooth, A. Stahl17 Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron,
Hamburg, Germany
M. Aldaya Martin, T. Arndt, C. Asawatangtrakuldee, K. Beernaert, O. Behnke, U.
Behrens, A. Bermúdez Martínez, A.A. Bin Anuar, K. Borras18, V. Botta, A.
Campbell, P. Connor, C. Contreras-Campana, F. Costanza, A. De Wit, C. Diez
Pardos, G. Eckerlin, D. Eckstein, T. Eichhorn, E. Eren, E. Gallo19, J. Garay
Garcia, A. Geiser, J.M. Grados Luyando, A. Grohsjean, P. Gunnellini, M.
Guthoff, A. Harb, J. Hauk, M. Hempel20, H. Jung, M. Kasemann, J. Keaveney, C.
Kleinwort, I. Korol, D. Krücker, W. Lange, A. Lelek, T. Lenz, K. Lipka, W.
Lohmann20, R. Mankel, I.-A. Melzer-Pellmann, A.B. Meyer, M. Meyer, M.
Missiroli, G. Mittag, J. Mnich, A. Mussgiller, D. Pitzl, A. Raspereza, M.
Savitskyi, P. Saxena, R. Shevchenko, N. Stefaniuk, H. Tholen, G.P. Van Onsem,
R. Walsh, Y. Wen, K. Wichmann, C. Wissing, O. Zenaiev University of Hamburg,
Hamburg, Germany
R. Aggleton, S. Bein, V. Blobel, M. Centis Vignali, T. Dreyer, E. Garutti, D.
Gonzalez, J. Haller, A. Hinzmann, M. Hoffmann, A. Karavdina, G. Kasieczka, R.
Klanner, R. Kogler, N. Kovalchuk, S. Kurz, D. Marconi, J. Multhaup, M.
Niedziela, D. Nowatschin, T. Peiffer, A. Perieanu, A. Reimers, C. Scharf, P.
Schleper, A. Schmidt, S. Schumann, J. Schwandt, J. Sonneveld, H. Stadie, G.
Steinbrück, F.M. Stober, M. Stöver, D. Troendle, E. Usai, A. Vanhoefer, B.
Vormwald Institut für Experimentelle Teilchenphysik, Karlsruhe, Germany
M. Akbiyik, C. Barth, M. Baselga, S. Baur, E. Butz, R. Caspart, T. Chwalek, F.
Colombo, W. De Boer, A. Dierlamm, N. Faltermann, B. Freund, R. Friese, M.
Giffels, M.A. Harrendorf, F. Hartmann17, S.M. Heindl, U. Husemann, F.
Kassel17, S. Kudella, H. Mildner, M.U. Mozer, Th. Müller, M. Plagge, G. Quast,
K. Rabbertz, M. Schröder, I. Shvetsov, G. Sieber, H.J. Simonis, R. Ulrich, S.
Wayand, M. Weber, T. Weiler, S. Williamson, C. Wöhrmann, R. Wolf Institute of
Nuclear and Particle Physics (INPP), NCSR Demokritos, Aghia Paraskevi, Greece
G. Anagnostou, G. Daskalakis, T. Geralis, A. Kyriakis, D. Loukas, I. Topsis-
Giotis National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
G. Karathanasis, S. Kesisoglou, A. Panagiotou, N. Saoulidou, E. Tziaferi
National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece
K. Kousouris, I. Papakrivopoulos University of Ioánnina, Ioánnina, Greece
I. Evangelou, C. Foudas, P. Gianneios, P. Katsoulis, P. Kokkas, S. Mallios, N.
Manthos, I. Papadopoulos, E. Paradas, J. Strologas, F.A. Triantis, D.
Tsitsonis MTA-ELTE Lendület CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, Eötvös
Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
M. Csanad, N. Filipovic, G. Pasztor, O. Surányi, G.I. Veres21 Wigner Research
Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
G. Bencze, C. Hajdu, D. Horvath22, Á. Hunyadi, F. Sikler, T.Á. Vámi, V.
Veszpremi, G. Vesztergombi21 Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen,
Hungary
N. Beni, S. Czellar, J. Karancsi23, A. Makovec, J. Molnar, Z. Szillasi
Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
M. Bartók21, P. Raics, Z.L. Trocsanyi, B. Ujvari Indian Institute of Science
(IISc), Bangalore, India
S. Choudhury, J.R. Komaragiri National Institute of Science Education and
Research, Bhubaneswar, India
S. Bahinipati24, P. Mal, K. Mandal, A. Nayak25, D.K. Sahoo24, N. Sahoo, S.K.
Swain Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
S. Bansal, S.B. Beri, V. Bhatnagar, R. Chawla, N. Dhingra, R. Gupta, A. Kaur,
M. Kaur, S. Kaur, R. Kumar, P. Kumari, A. Mehta, S. Sharma, J.B. Singh, G.
Walia University of Delhi, Delhi, India
A. Bhardwaj, S. Chauhan, B.C. Choudhary, R.B. Garg, S. Keshri, A. Kumar, Ashok
Kumar, S. Malhotra, M. Naimuddin, K. Ranjan, Aashaq Shah, R. Sharma Saha
Institute of Nuclear Physics, HBNI, Kolkata, India
R. Bhardwaj26, R. Bhattacharya, S. Bhattacharya, U. Bhawandeep26, D. Bhowmik,
S. Dey, S. Dutt26, S. Dutta, S. Ghosh, N. Majumdar, A. Modak, K. Mondal, S.
Mukhopadhyay, S. Nandan, A. Purohit, P.K. Rout, A. Roy, S. Roy Chowdhury, S.
Sarkar, M. Sharan, B. Singh, S. Thakur26 Indian Institute of Technology
Madras, Madras, India
P.K. Behera Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India
R. Chudasama, D. Dutta, V. Jha, V. Kumar, A.K. Mohanty17, P.K. Netrakanti,
L.M. Pant, P. Shukla, A. Topkar Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-A,
Mumbai, India
T. Aziz, S. Dugad, B. Mahakud, S. Mitra, G.B. Mohanty, N. Sur, B. Sutar Tata
Institute of Fundamental Research-B, Mumbai, India
S. Banerjee, S. Bhattacharya, S. Chatterjee, P. Das, M. Guchait, Sa. Jain, S.
Kumar, M. Maity27, G. Majumder, K. Mazumdar, T. Sarkar27, N. Wickramage28
Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune, India
S. Chauhan, S. Dube, V. Hegde, A. Kapoor, K. Kothekar, S. Pandey, A. Rane, S.
Sharma Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran
S. Chenarani29, E. Eskandari Tadavani, S.M. Etesami29, M. Khakzad, M.
Mohammadi Najafabadi, M. Naseri, S. Paktinat Mehdiabadi30, F. Rezaei
Hosseinabadi, B. Safarzadeh31, M. Zeinali University College Dublin, Dublin,
Ireland
M. Felcini, M. Grunewald INFN Sezione di Bari a, Università di Bari b,
Politecnico di Bari c, Bari, Italy
M. Abbresciaa,b, C. Calabriaa,b, A. Colaleoa, D. Creanzaa,c, L. Cristellaa,b,
N. De Filippisa,c, M. De Palmaa,b, A. Di Florioa,b, F. Erricoa,b, L. Fiorea,
G. Iasellia,c, S. Lezkia,b, G. Maggia,c, M. Maggia, B. Marangellia,b, G.
Minielloa,b, S. Mya,b, S. Nuzzoa,b, A. Pompilia,b, G. Pugliesea,c, R.
Radognaa, A. Ranieria, G. Selvaggia,b, A. Sharmaa, L. Silvestrisa,17, R.
Vendittia, P. Verwilligena, G. Zitoa INFN Sezione di Bologna a, Università di
Bologna b, Bologna, Italy
G. Abbiendia, C. Battilanaa,b, D. Bonacorsia,b, L. Borgonovia,b, S. Braibant-
Giacomellia,b, R. Campaninia,b, P. Capiluppia,b, A. Castroa,b, F.R. Cavalloa,
S.S. Chhibraa,b, G. Codispotia,b, M. Cuffiania,b, G.M. Dallavallea, F.
Fabbria, A. Fanfania,b, D. Fasanellaa,b, P. Giacomellia, C. Grandia, L.
Guiduccia,b, F. Iemmi, S. Marcellinia, G. Masettia, A. Montanaria, F.L.
Navarriaa,b, A. Perrottaa, A.M. Rossia,b, T. Rovellia,b, G.P. Sirolia,b, N.
Tosia INFN Sezione di Catania a, Università di Catania b, Catania, Italy
S. Albergoa,b, S. Costaa,b, A. Di Mattiaa, F. Giordanoa,b, R. Potenzaa,b, A.
Tricomia,b, C. Tuvea,b INFN Sezione di Firenze a, Università di Firenze b,
Firenze, Italy
G. Barbaglia, K. Chatterjeea,b, V. Ciullia,b, C. Civininia, R.
D’Alessandroa,b, E. Focardia,b, G. Latino, P. Lenzia,b, M. Meschinia, S.
Paolettia, L. Russoa,32, G. Sguazzonia, D. Stroma, L. Viliania INFN Laboratori
Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
L. Benussi, S. Bianco, F. Fabbri, D. Piccolo, F. Primavera17 INFN Sezione di
Genova a, Università di Genova b, Genova, Italy
V. Calvellia,b, F. Ferroa, F. Raveraa,b, E. Robuttia, S. Tosia,b INFN Sezione
di Milano-Bicocca a, Università di Milano-Bicocca b, Milano, Italy
A. Benagliaa, A. Beschib, L. Brianzaa,b, F. Brivioa,b, V. Cirioloa,b,17, M.E.
Dinardoa,b, S. Fiorendia,b, S. Gennaia, A. Ghezzia,b, P. Govonia,b, M.
Malbertia,b, S. Malvezzia, R.A. Manzonia,b, D. Menascea, L. Moronia, M.
Paganonia,b, K. Pauwelsa,b, D. Pedrinia, S. Pigazzinia,b,33, S. Ragazzia,b, T.
Tabarelli de Fatisa,b INFN Sezione di Napoli a, Università di Napoli ’Federico
II’ b, Napoli, Italy, Università della Basilicata c, Potenza, Italy,
Università G. Marconi d, Roma, Italy
S. Buontempoa, N. Cavalloa,c, S. Di Guidaa,d,17, F. Fabozzia,c, F. Fiengaa,b,
A.O.M. Iorioa,b, W.A. Khana, L. Listaa, S. Meolaa,d,17, P. Paoluccia,17, C.
Sciaccaa,b, F. Thyssena INFN Sezione di Padova a, Università di Padova b,
Padova, Italy, Università di Trento c, Trento, Italy
P. Azzia, N. Bacchettaa, L. Benatoa,b, D. Biselloa,b, A. Bolettia,b, R.
Carlina,b, A. Carvalho Antunes De Oliveiraa,b, P. Checchiaa, M. Dall’Ossoa,b,
P. De Castro Manzanoa, T. Dorigoa, F. Gasparinia,b, U. Gasparinia,b, A.
Gozzelinoa, S. Lacapraraa, P. Lujan, M. Margonia,b, A.T. Meneguzzoa,b, N.
Pozzobona,b, P. Ronchesea,b, R. Rossina,b, F. Simonettoa,b, A. Tiko, E.
Torassaa, M. Zanettia,b, P. Zottoa,b, G. Zumerlea,b INFN Sezione di Pavia a,
Università di Pavia b, Pavia, Italy
A. Braghieria, A. Magnania, P. Montagnaa,b, S.P. Rattia,b, V. Rea, M.
Ressegottia,b, C. Riccardia,b, P. Salvinia, I. Vaia,b, P. Vituloa,b INFN
Sezione di Perugia a, Università di Perugia b, Perugia, Italy
L. Alunni Solestizia,b, M. Biasinia,b, G.M. Bileia, C. Cecchia,b, D.
Ciangottinia,b, L. Fanòa,b, P. Laricciaa,b, R. Leonardia,b, E. Manonia, G.
Mantovania,b, V. Mariania,b, M. Menichellia, A. Rossia,b, A. Santocchiaa,b, D.
Spigaa INFN Sezione di Pisa a, Università di Pisa b, Scuola Normale Superiore
di Pisa c, Pisa, Italy
K. Androsova, P. Azzurria,17, G. Bagliesia, L. Bianchinia, T. Boccalia, L.
Borrello, R. Castaldia, M.A. Cioccia,b, R. Dell’Orsoa, G. Fedia, L.
Gianninia,c, A. Giassia, M.T. Grippoa,32, F. Ligabuea,c, T. Lomtadzea, E.
Mancaa,c, G. Mandorlia,c, A. Messineoa,b, F. Pallaa, A. Rizzia,b, P.
Spagnoloa, R. Tenchinia, G. Tonellia,b, A. Venturia, P.G. Verdinia INFN
Sezione di Roma a, Sapienza Università di Roma b, Rome, Italy
L. Baronea,b, F. Cavallaria, M. Cipriania,b, N. Dacia, D. Del Rea,b, E. Di
Marcoa,b, M. Diemoza, S. Gellia,b, E. Longoa,b, F. Margarolia,b, B.
Marzocchia,b, P. Meridiania, G. Organtinia,b, R. Paramattia,b, F. Preiatoa,b,
S. Rahatloua,b, C. Rovellia, F. Santanastasioa,b INFN Sezione di Torino a,
Università di Torino b, Torino, Italy, Università del Piemonte Orientale c,
Novara, Italy
N. Amapanea,b, R. Arcidiaconoa,c, S. Argiroa,b, M. Arneodoa,c, N. Bartosika,
R. Bellana,b, C. Biinoa, N. Cartigliaa, R. Castelloa,b, F. Cennaa,b, M.
Costaa,b, R. Covarellia,b, A. Deganoa,b, N. Demariaa, B. Kiania,b, C.
Mariottia, S. Masellia, E. Migliorea,b, V. Monacoa,b, E. Monteila,b, M.
Montenoa, M.M. Obertinoa,b, L. Pachera,b, N. Pastronea, M. Pelliccionia, G.L.
Pinna Angionia,b, A. Romeroa,b, M. Ruspaa,c, R. Sacchia,b, K. Shchelinaa,b, V.
Solaa, A. Solanoa,b, A. Staianoa, P. Traczyka,b INFN Sezione di Trieste a,
Università di Trieste b, Trieste, Italy
S. Belfortea, M. Casarsaa, F. Cossuttia, G. Della Riccaa,b, A. Zanettia
Kyungpook National University
D.H. Kim, G.N. Kim, M.S. Kim, J. Lee, S. Lee, S.W. Lee, C.S. Moon, Y.D. Oh, S.
Sekmen, D.C. Son, Y.C. Yang Chonnam National University, Institute for
Universe and Elementary Particles, Kwangju, Korea
H. Kim, D.H. Moon, G. Oh Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea
J.A. Brochero Cifuentes, J. Goh, T.J. Kim Korea University, Seoul, Korea
S. Cho, S. Choi, Y. Go, D. Gyun, S. Ha, B. Hong, Y. Jo, Y. Kim, K. Lee, K.S.
Lee, S. Lee, J. Lim, S.K. Park, Y. Roh Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
J. Almond, J. Kim, J.S. Kim, H. Lee, K. Lee, K. Nam, S.B. Oh, B.C. Radburn-
Smith, S.h. Seo, U.K. Yang, H.D. Yoo, G.B. Yu University of Seoul, Seoul,
Korea
H. Kim, J.H. Kim, J.S.H. Lee, I.C. Park Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea
Y. Choi, C. Hwang, J. Lee, I. Yu Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
V. Dudenas, A. Juodagalvis, J. Vaitkus National Centre for Particle Physics,
Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
I. Ahmed, Z.A. Ibrahim, M.A.B. Md Ali34, F. Mohamad Idris35, W.A.T. Wan
Abdullah, M.N. Yusli, Z. Zolkapli Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios
Avanzados del IPN, Mexico City, Mexico
Duran-Osuna, M. C., H. Castilla-Valdez, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, Ramirez-Sanchez,
G., I. Heredia-De La Cruz36, Rabadan-Trejo, R. I., R. Lopez-Fernandez, J.
Mejia Guisao, Reyes-Almanza, R, A. Sanchez-Hernandez Universidad
Iberoamericana, Mexico City, Mexico
S. Carrillo Moreno, C. Oropeza Barrera, F. Vazquez Valencia Benemerita
Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico
J. Eysermans, I. Pedraza, H.A. Salazar Ibarguen, C. Uribe Estrada Universidad
Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, San Luis Potosí, Mexico
A. Morelos Pineda University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
D. Krofcheck University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
P.H. Butler National Centre for Physics, Quaid-I-Azam University, Islamabad,
Pakistan
A. Ahmad, M. Ahmad, Q. Hassan, H.R. Hoorani, A. Saddique, M.A. Shah, M.
Shoaib, M. Waqas National Centre for Nuclear Research, Swierk, Poland
H. Bialkowska, M. Bluj, B. Boimska, T. Frueboes, M. Górski, M. Kazana, K.
Nawrocki, M. Szleper, P. Zalewski Institute of Experimental Physics, Faculty
of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
K. Bunkowski, A. Byszuk37, K. Doroba, A. Kalinowski, M. Konecki, J.
Krolikowski, M. Misiura, M. Olszewski, A. Pyskir, M. Walczak Laboratório de
Instrumentação e Física Experimental de Partículas, Lisboa, Portugal
P. Bargassa, C. Beirão Da Cruz E Silva, A. Di Francesco, P. Faccioli, B.
Galinhas, M. Gallinaro, J. Hollar, N. Leonardo, L. Lloret Iglesias, M.V.
Nemallapudi, J. Seixas, G. Strong, O. Toldaiev, D. Vadruccio, J. Varela Joint
Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
S. Afanasiev, P. Bunin, M. Gavrilenko, I. Golutvin, I. Gorbunov, A. Kamenev,
V. Karjavin, A. Lanev, A. Malakhov, V. Matveev38,39, P. Moisenz, V. Palichik,
V. Perelygin, S. Shmatov, S. Shulha, N. Skatchkov, V. Smirnov, N. Voytishin,
A. Zarubin Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina (St. Petersburg),
Russia
Y. Ivanov, V. Kim40, E. Kuznetsova41, P. Levchenko, V. Murzin, V. Oreshkin, I.
Smirnov, D. Sosnov, V. Sulimov, L. Uvarov, S. Vavilov, A. Vorobyev Institute
for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia
Yu. Andreev, A. Dermenev, S. Gninenko, N. Golubev, A. Karneyeu, M. Kirsanov,
N. Krasnikov, A. Pashenkov, D. Tlisov, A. Toropin Institute for Theoretical
and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
V. Epshteyn, V. Gavrilov, N. Lychkovskaya, V. Popov, I. Pozdnyakov, G.
Safronov, A. Spiridonov, A. Stepennov, V. Stolin, M. Toms, E. Vlasov, A.
Zhokin Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Moscow, Russia
T. Aushev, A. Bylinkin39 National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow
Engineering Physics Institute’ (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia
M. Chadeeva42, P. Parygin, D. Philippov, S. Polikarpov, E. Popova, V. Rusinov
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
V. Andreev, M. Azarkin39, I. Dremin39, M. Kirakosyan39, S.V. Rusakov, A.
Terkulov Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State
University, Moscow, Russia
A. Baskakov, A. Belyaev, E. Boos, V. Bunichev, M. Dubinin43, L. Dudko, A.
Ershov, A. Gribushin, V. Klyukhin, O. Kodolova, I. Lokhtin, I. Miagkov, S.
Obraztsov, M. Perfilov, V. Savrin Novosibirsk State University (NSU),
Novosibirsk, Russia
V. Blinov44, D. Shtol44, Y. Skovpen44 State Research Center of Russian
Federation, Institute for High Energy Physics of NRC &quot, Kurchatov
Institute&quot, , Protvino, Russia
I. Azhgirey, I. Bayshev, S. Bitioukov, D. Elumakhov, A. Godizov, V. Kachanov,
A. Kalinin, D. Konstantinov, P. Mandrik, V. Petrov, R. Ryutin, A. Sobol, S.
Troshin, N. Tyurin, A. Uzunian, A. Volkov National Research Tomsk Polytechnic
University, Tomsk, Russia
A. Babaev University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of
Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia
P. Adzic45, P. Cirkovic, D. Devetak, M. Dordevic, J. Milosevic Centro de
Investigaciones Energéticas Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (CIEMAT), Madrid,
Spain
J. Alcaraz Maestre, A. Álvarez Fernández, I. Bachiller, M. Barrio Luna, M.
Cerrada, N. Colino, B. De La Cruz, A. Delgado Peris, C. Fernandez Bedoya, J.P.
Fernández Ramos, J. Flix, M.C. Fouz, O. Gonzalez Lopez, S. Goy Lopez, J.M.
Hernandez, M.I. Josa, D. Moran, A. Pérez-Calero Yzquierdo, J. Puerta Pelayo,
I. Redondo, L. Romero, M.S. Soares, A. Triossi Universidad Autónoma de Madrid,
Madrid, Spain
C. Albajar, J.F. de Trocóniz Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
J. Cuevas, C. Erice, J. Fernandez Menendez, S. Folgueras, I. Gonzalez
Caballero, J.R. González Fernández, E. Palencia Cortezon, S. Sanchez Cruz, P.
Vischia, J.M. Vizan Garcia Instituto de Física de Cantabria (IFCA), CSIC-
Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
I.J. Cabrillo, A. Calderon, B. Chazin Quero, J. Duarte Campderros, M.
Fernandez, P.J. Fernández Manteca, A. García Alonso, J. Garcia-Ferrero, G.
Gomez, A. Lopez Virto, J. Marco, C. Martinez Rivero, P. Martinez Ruiz del
Arbol, F. Matorras, J. Piedra Gomez, C. Prieels, T. Rodrigo, A. Ruiz-Jimeno,
L. Scodellaro, N. Trevisani, I. Vila, R. Vilar Cortabitarte CERN, European
Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland
D. Abbaneo, B. Akgun, E. Auffray, P. Baillon, A.H. Ball, D. Barney, J.
Bendavid, M. Bianco, A. Bocci, C. Botta, T. Camporesi, M. Cepeda, G.
Cerminara, E. Chapon, Y. Chen, D. d’Enterria, A. Dabrowski, V. Daponte, A.
David, M. De Gruttola, A. De Roeck, N. Deelen, M. Dobson, T. du Pree, M.
Dünser, N. Dupont, A. Elliott-Peisert, P. Everaerts, F. Fallavollita46, G.
Franzoni, J. Fulcher, W. Funk, D. Gigi, A. Gilbert, K. Gill, F. Glege, D.
Gulhan, J. Hegeman, V. Innocente, A. Jafari, P. Janot, O. Karacheban20, J.
Kieseler, V. Knünz, A. Kornmayer, M.J. Kortelainen, M. Krammer1, C. Lange, P.
Lecoq, C. Lourenço, M.T. Lucchini, L. Malgeri, M. Mannelli, A. Martelli, F.
Meijers, J.A. Merlin, S. Mersi, E. Meschi, P. Milenovic47, F. Moortgat, M.
Mulders, H. Neugebauer, J. Ngadiuba, S. Orfanelli, L. Orsini, F. Pantaleo17,
L. Pape, E. Perez, M. Peruzzi, A. Petrilli, G. Petrucciani, A. Pfeiffer, M.
Pierini, F.M. Pitters, D. Rabady, A. Racz, T. Reis, G. Rolandi48, M. Rovere,
H. Sakulin, C. Schäfer, C. Schwick, M. Seidel, M. Selvaggi, A. Sharma, P.
Silva, P. Sphicas49, A. Stakia, J. Steggemann, M. Stoye, M. Tosi, D. Treille,
A. Tsirou, V. Veckalns50, M. Verweij, W.D. Zeuner Paul Scherrer Institut,
Villigen, Switzerland
W. Bertl${}^{\textrm{\textdagger}}$, L. Caminada51, K. Deiters, W. Erdmann, R.
Horisberger, Q. Ingram, H.C. Kaestli, D. Kotlinski, U. Langenegger, T. Rohe,
S.A. Wiederkehr ETH Zurich - Institute for Particle Physics and Astrophysics
(IPA), Zurich, Switzerland
M. Backhaus, L. Bäni, P. Berger, B. Casal, G. Dissertori, M. Dittmar, M.
Donegà, C. Dorfer, C. Grab, C. Heidegger, D. Hits, J. Hoss, T. Klijnsma, W.
Lustermann, M. Marionneau, M.T. Meinhard, D. Meister, F. Micheli, P. Musella,
F. Nessi-Tedaldi, F. Pandolfi, J. Pata, F. Pauss, G. Perrin, L. Perrozzi, M.
Quittnat, M. Reichmann, D.A. Sanz Becerra, M. Schönenberger, L. Shchutska,
V.R. Tavolaro, K. Theofilatos, M.L. Vesterbacka Olsson, R. Wallny, D.H. Zhu
Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
T.K. Aarrestad, C. Amsler52, D. Brzhechko, M.F. Canelli, A. De Cosa, R. Del
Burgo, S. Donato, C. Galloni, T. Hreus, B. Kilminster, I. Neutelings, D.
Pinna, G. Rauco, P. Robmann, D. Salerno, K. Schweiger, C. Seitz, Y. Takahashi,
A. Zucchetta National Central University, Chung-Li, Taiwan
V. Candelise, Y.H. Chang, K.y. Cheng, T.H. Doan, Sh. Jain, R. Khurana, C.M.
Kuo, W. Lin, A. Pozdnyakov, S.S. Yu National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei,
Taiwan
P. Chang, Y. Chao, K.F. Chen, P.H. Chen, F. Fiori, W.-S. Hou, Y. Hsiung, Arun
Kumar, Y.F. Liu, R.-S. Lu, E. Paganis, A. Psallidas, A. Steen, J.f. Tsai
Chulalongkorn University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physics, Bangkok,
Thailand
B. Asavapibhop, K. Kovitanggoon, G. Singh, N. Srimanobhas Çukurova University,
Physics Department, Science and Art Faculty, Adana, Turkey
A. Bat, F. Boran, S. Damarseckin, Z.S. Demiroglu, C. Dozen, E. Eskut, S.
Girgis, G. Gokbulut, Y. Guler, I. Hos53, E.E. Kangal54, O. Kara, A. Kayis
Topaksu, U. Kiminsu, M. Oglakci, G. Onengut, K. Ozdemir55, S. Ozturk56, A.
Polatoz, B. Tali57, U.G. Tok, S. Turkcapar, I.S. Zorbakir, C. Zorbilmez Middle
East Technical University, Physics Department, Ankara, Turkey
G. Karapinar58, K. Ocalan59, M. Yalvac, M. Zeyrek Bogazici University,
Istanbul, Turkey
E. Gülmez, M. Kaya60, O. Kaya61, S. Tekten, E.A. Yetkin62 Istanbul Technical
University, Istanbul, Turkey
M.N. Agaras, S. Atay, A. Cakir, K. Cankocak, Y. Komurcu Institute for
Scintillation Materials of National Academy of Science of Ukraine, Kharkov,
Ukraine
B. Grynyov National Scientific Center, Kharkov Institute of Physics and
Technology, Kharkov, Ukraine
L. Levchuk University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
F. Ball, L. Beck, J.J. Brooke, D. Burns, E. Clement, D. Cussans, O. Davignon,
H. Flacher, J. Goldstein, G.P. Heath, H.F. Heath, L. Kreczko, D.M. Newbold63,
S. Paramesvaran, T. Sakuma, S. Seif El Nasr-storey, D. Smith, V.J. Smith
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
K.W. Bell, A. Belyaev64, C. Brew, R.M. Brown, L. Calligaris, D. Cieri, D.J.A.
Cockerill, J.A. Coughlan, K. Harder, S. Harper, J. Linacre, E. Olaiya, D.
Petyt, C.H. Shepherd-Themistocleous, A. Thea, I.R. Tomalin, T. Williams, W.J.
Womersley Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
G. Auzinger, R. Bainbridge, P. Bloch, J. Borg, S. Breeze, O. Buchmuller, A.
Bundock, S. Casasso, D. Colling, L. Corpe, P. Dauncey, G. Davies, M. Della
Negra, R. Di Maria, Y. Haddad, G. Hall, G. Iles, T. James, M. Komm, R. Lane,
C. Laner, L. Lyons, A.-M. Magnan, S. Malik, L. Mastrolorenzo, T. Matsushita,
J. Nash65, A. Nikitenko7, V. Palladino, M. Pesaresi, A. Richards, A. Rose, E.
Scott, C. Seez, A. Shtipliyski, T. Strebler, S. Summers, A. Tapper, K. Uchida,
M. Vazquez Acosta66, T. Virdee17, N. Wardle, D. Winterbottom, J. Wright, S.C.
Zenz Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
J.E. Cole, P.R. Hobson, A. Khan, P. Kyberd, A. Morton, I.D. Reid, L.
Teodorescu, S. Zahid Baylor University, Waco, USA
A. Borzou, K. Call, J. Dittmann, K. Hatakeyama, H. Liu, N. Pastika, C. Smith
Catholic University of America, Washington DC, USA
R. Bartek, A. Dominguez The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA
A. Buccilli, S.I. Cooper, C. Henderson, P. Rumerio, C. West Boston University,
Boston, USA
D. Arcaro, A. Avetisyan, T. Bose, D. Gastler, D. Rankin, C. Richardson, J.
Rohlf, L. Sulak, D. Zou Brown University, Providence, USA
G. Benelli, D. Cutts, M. Hadley, J. Hakala, U. Heintz, J.M. Hogan67, K.H.M.
Kwok, E. Laird, G. Landsberg, J. Lee, Z. Mao, M. Narain, J. Pazzini, S.
Piperov, S. Sagir, R. Syarif, D. Yu University of California, Davis, Davis,
USA
R. Band, C. Brainerd, R. Breedon, D. Burns, M. Calderon De La Barca Sanchez,
M. Chertok, J. Conway, R. Conway, P.T. Cox, R. Erbacher, C. Flores, G. Funk,
W. Ko, R. Lander, C. Mclean, M. Mulhearn, D. Pellett, J. Pilot, S. Shalhout,
M. Shi, J. Smith, D. Stolp, D. Taylor, K. Tos, M. Tripathi, Z. Wang, F. Zhang
University of California, Los Angeles, USA
M. Bachtis, C. Bravo, R. Cousins, A. Dasgupta, A. Florent, J. Hauser, M.
Ignatenko, N. Mccoll, S. Regnard, D. Saltzberg, C. Schnaible, V. Valuev
University of California, Riverside, Riverside, USA
E. Bouvier, K. Burt, R. Clare, J. Ellison, J.W. Gary, S.M.A. Ghiasi Shirazi,
G. Hanson, G. Karapostoli, E. Kennedy, F. Lacroix, O.R. Long, M. Olmedo
Negrete, M.I. Paneva, W. Si, L. Wang, H. Wei, S. Wimpenny, B. R. Yates
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, USA
J.G. Branson, S. Cittolin, M. Derdzinski, R. Gerosa, D. Gilbert, B. Hashemi,
A. Holzner, D. Klein, G. Kole, V. Krutelyov, J. Letts, M. Masciovecchio, D.
Olivito, S. Padhi, M. Pieri, M. Sani, V. Sharma, S. Simon, M. Tadel, A.
Vartak, S. Wasserbaech68, J. Wood, F. Würthwein, A. Yagil, G. Zevi Della Porta
University of California, Santa Barbara - Department of Physics, Santa
Barbara, USA
N. Amin, R. Bhandari, J. Bradmiller-Feld, C. Campagnari, M. Citron, A. Dishaw,
V. Dutta, M. Franco Sevilla, L. Gouskos, R. Heller, J. Incandela, A.
Ovcharova, H. Qu, J. Richman, D. Stuart, I. Suarez, J. Yoo California
Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA
D. Anderson, A. Bornheim, J. Bunn, J.M. Lawhorn, H.B. Newman, T. Q. Nguyen, C.
Pena, M. Spiropulu, J.R. Vlimant, R. Wilkinson, S. Xie, Z. Zhang, R.Y. Zhu
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA
M.B. Andrews, T. Ferguson, T. Mudholkar, M. Paulini, J. Russ, M. Sun, H.
Vogel, I. Vorobiev, M. Weinberg University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, USA
J.P. Cumalat, W.T. Ford, F. Jensen, A. Johnson, M. Krohn, S. Leontsinis, E.
Macdonald, T. Mulholland, K. Stenson, K.A. Ulmer, S.R. Wagner Cornell
University, Ithaca, USA
J. Alexander, J. Chaves, Y. Cheng, J. Chu, A. Datta, S. Dittmer, K. Mcdermott,
N. Mirman, J.R. Patterson, D. Quach, A. Rinkevicius, A. Ryd, L. Skinnari, L.
Soffi, S.M. Tan, Z. Tao, J. Thom, J. Tucker, P. Wittich, M. Zientek Fermi
National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USA
S. Abdullin, M. Albrow, M. Alyari, G. Apollinari, A. Apresyan, A. Apyan, S.
Banerjee, L.A.T. Bauerdick, A. Beretvas, J. Berryhill, P.C. Bhat, G.
Bolla${}^{\textrm{\textdagger}}$, K. Burkett, J.N. Butler, A. Canepa, G.B.
Cerati, H.W.K. Cheung, F. Chlebana, M. Cremonesi, J. Duarte, V.D. Elvira, J.
Freeman, Z. Gecse, E. Gottschalk, L. Gray, D. Green, S. Grünendahl, O.
Gutsche, J. Hanlon, R.M. Harris, S. Hasegawa, J. Hirschauer, Z. Hu, B.
Jayatilaka, S. Jindariani, M. Johnson, U. Joshi, B. Klima, B. Kreis, S.
Lammel, D. Lincoln, R. Lipton, M. Liu, T. Liu, R. Lopes De Sá, J. Lykken, K.
Maeshima, N. Magini, J.M. Marraffino, D. Mason, P. McBride, P. Merkel, S.
Mrenna, S. Nahn, V. O’Dell, K. Pedro, O. Prokofyev, G. Rakness, L. Ristori, A.
Savoy-Navarro69, B. Schneider, E. Sexton-Kennedy, A. Soha, W.J. Spalding, L.
Spiegel, S. Stoynev, J. Strait, N. Strobbe, L. Taylor, S. Tkaczyk, N.V. Tran,
L. Uplegger, E.W. Vaandering, C. Vernieri, M. Verzocchi, R. Vidal, M. Wang,
H.A. Weber, A. Whitbeck, W. Wu University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
D. Acosta, P. Avery, P. Bortignon, D. Bourilkov, A. Brinkerhoff, A. Carnes, M.
Carver, D. Curry, R.D. Field, I.K. Furic, S.V. Gleyzer, B.M. Joshi, J.
Konigsberg, A. Korytov, K. Kotov, P. Ma, K. Matchev, H. Mei, G. Mitselmakher,
K. Shi, D. Sperka, N. Terentyev, L. Thomas, J. Wang, S. Wang, J. Yelton
Florida International University, Miami, USA
Y.R. Joshi, S. Linn, P. Markowitz, J.L. Rodriguez Florida State University,
Tallahassee, USA
A. Ackert, T. Adams, A. Askew, S. Hagopian, V. Hagopian, K.F. Johnson, T.
Kolberg, G. Martinez, T. Perry, H. Prosper, A. Saha, A. Santra, V. Sharma, R.
Yohay Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, USA
M.M. Baarmand, V. Bhopatkar, S. Colafranceschi, M. Hohlmann, D. Noonan, T.
Roy, F. Yumiceva University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, USA
M.R. Adams, L. Apanasevich, D. Berry, R.R. Betts, R. Cavanaugh, X. Chen, O.
Evdokimov, C.E. Gerber, D.A. Hangal, D.J. Hofman, K. Jung, J. Kamin, I.D.
Sandoval Gonzalez, M.B. Tonjes, N. Varelas, H. Wang, Z. Wu, J. Zhang The
University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
B. Bilki70, W. Clarida, K. Dilsiz71, S. Durgut, R.P. Gandrajula, M.
Haytmyradov, V. Khristenko, J.-P. Merlo, H. Mermerkaya72, A. Mestvirishvili,
A. Moeller, J. Nachtman, H. Ogul73, Y. Onel, F. Ozok74, A. Penzo, C. Snyder,
E. Tiras, J. Wetzel, K. Yi Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
B. Blumenfeld, A. Cocoros, N. Eminizer, D. Fehling, L. Feng, A.V. Gritsan, P.
Maksimovic, J. Roskes, U. Sarica, M. Swartz, M. Xiao, C. You The University of
Kansas, Lawrence, USA
A. Al-bataineh, P. Baringer, A. Bean, S. Boren, J. Bowen, J. Castle, S.
Khalil, A. Kropivnitskaya, D. Majumder, W. Mcbrayer, M. Murray, C. Rogan, C.
Royon, S. Sanders, E. Schmitz, J.D. Tapia Takaki, Q. Wang Kansas State
University, Manhattan, USA
A. Ivanov, K. Kaadze, Y. Maravin, A. Mohammadi, L.K. Saini, N. Skhirtladze
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA
F. Rebassoo, D. Wright University of Maryland, College Park, USA
A. Baden, O. Baron, A. Belloni, S.C. Eno, Y. Feng, C. Ferraioli, N.J. Hadley,
S. Jabeen, G.Y. Jeng, R.G. Kellogg, J. Kunkle, A.C. Mignerey, F. Ricci-Tam,
Y.H. Shin, A. Skuja, S.C. Tonwar Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, USA
D. Abercrombie, B. Allen, V. Azzolini, R. Barbieri, A. Baty, G. Bauer, R. Bi,
S. Brandt, W. Busza, I.A. Cali, M. D’Alfonso, Z. Demiragli, G. Gomez Ceballos,
M. Goncharov, P. Harris, D. Hsu, M. Hu, Y. Iiyama, G.M. Innocenti, M. Klute,
D. Kovalskyi, Y.-J. Lee, A. Levin, P.D. Luckey, B. Maier, A.C. Marini, C.
Mcginn, C. Mironov, S. Narayanan, X. Niu, C. Paus, C. Roland, G. Roland, J.
Salfeld-Nebgen, G.S.F. Stephans, K. Sumorok, K. Tatar, D. Velicanu, J. Wang,
T.W. Wang, B. Wyslouch, S. Zhaozhong University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
A.C. Benvenuti, R.M. Chatterjee, A. Evans, P. Hansen, S. Kalafut, Y. Kubota,
Z. Lesko, J. Mans, S. Nourbakhsh, N. Ruckstuhl, R. Rusack, J. Turkewitz, M.A.
Wadud University of Mississippi, Oxford, USA
J.G. Acosta, S. Oliveros University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA
E. Avdeeva, K. Bloom, D.R. Claes, C. Fangmeier, F. Golf, R. Gonzalez Suarez,
R. Kamalieddin, I. Kravchenko, J. Monroy, J.E. Siado, G.R. Snow, B. Stieger
State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA
J. Dolen, A. Godshalk, C. Harrington, I. Iashvili, D. Nguyen, A. Parker, S.
Rappoccio, B. Roozbahani Northeastern University, Boston, USA
G. Alverson, E. Barberis, C. Freer, A. Hortiangtham, A. Massironi, D.M. Morse,
T. Orimoto, R. Teixeira De Lima, T. Wamorkar, B. Wang, A. Wisecarver, D. Wood
Northwestern University, Evanston, USA
S. Bhattacharya, O. Charaf, K.A. Hahn, N. Mucia, N. Odell, M.H. Schmitt, K.
Sung, M. Trovato, M. Velasco University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
R. Bucci, N. Dev, M. Hildreth, K. Hurtado Anampa, C. Jessop, D.J. Karmgard, N.
Kellams, K. Lannon, W. Li, N. Loukas, N. Marinelli, F. Meng, C. Mueller, Y.
Musienko38, M. Planer, A. Reinsvold, R. Ruchti, P. Siddireddy, G. Smith, S.
Taroni, M. Wayne, A. Wightman, M. Wolf, A. Woodard The Ohio State University,
Columbus, USA
J. Alimena, L. Antonelli, B. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, S. Flowers, B. Francis, A.
Hart, C. Hill, W. Ji, T.Y. Ling, W. Luo, B.L. Winer, H.W. Wulsin Princeton
University, Princeton, USA
S. Cooperstein, O. Driga, P. Elmer, J. Hardenbrook, P. Hebda, S. Higginbotham,
A. Kalogeropoulos, D. Lange, J. Luo, D. Marlow, K. Mei, I. Ojalvo, J. Olsen,
C. Palmer, P. Piroué, D. Stickland, C. Tully University of Puerto Rico,
Mayaguez, USA
S. Malik, S. Norberg Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
A. Barker, V.E. Barnes, S. Das, L. Gutay, M. Jones, A.W. Jung, A. Khatiwada,
D.H. Miller, N. Neumeister, C.C. Peng, H. Qiu, J.F. Schulte, J. Sun, F. Wang,
R. Xiao, W. Xie Purdue University Northwest, Hammond, USA
T. Cheng, N. Parashar Rice University, Houston, USA
Z. Chen, K.M. Ecklund, S. Freed, F.J.M. Geurts, M. Guilbaud, M. Kilpatrick, W.
Li, B. Michlin, B.P. Padley, J. Roberts, J. Rorie, W. Shi, Z. Tu, J. Zabel, A.
Zhang University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
A. Bodek, P. de Barbaro, R. Demina, Y.t. Duh, T. Ferbel, M. Galanti, A.
Garcia-Bellido, J. Han, O. Hindrichs, A. Khukhunaishvili, K.H. Lo, P. Tan, M.
Verzetti The Rockefeller University, New York, USA
R. Ciesielski, K. Goulianos, C. Mesropian Rutgers, The State University of New
Jersey, Piscataway, USA
A. Agapitos, J.P. Chou, Y. Gershtein, T.A. Gómez Espinosa, E. Halkiadakis, M.
Heindl, E. Hughes, S. Kaplan, R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, S. Kyriacou, A. Lath,
R. Montalvo, K. Nash, M. Osherson, H. Saka, S. Salur, S. Schnetzer, D.
Sheffield, S. Somalwar, R. Stone, S. Thomas, P. Thomassen, M. Walker
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
A.G. Delannoy, J. Heideman, G. Riley, K. Rose, S. Spanier, K. Thapa Texas A&M
University, College Station, USA
O. Bouhali75, A. Castaneda Hernandez75, A. Celik, M. Dalchenko, M. De Mattia,
A. Delgado, S. Dildick, R. Eusebi, J. Gilmore, T. Huang, T. Kamon76, R.
Mueller, Y. Pakhotin, R. Patel, A. Perloff, L. Perniè, D. Rathjens, A.
Safonov, A. Tatarinov Texas Tech University, Lubbock, USA
N. Akchurin, J. Damgov, F. De Guio, P.R. Dudero, J. Faulkner, E. Gurpinar, S.
Kunori, K. Lamichhane, S.W. Lee, T. Mengke, S. Muthumuni, T. Peltola, S.
Undleeb, I. Volobouev, Z. Wang Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
S. Greene, A. Gurrola, R. Janjam, W. Johns, C. Maguire, A. Melo, H. Ni, K.
Padeken, P. Sheldon, S. Tuo, J. Velkovska, Q. Xu University of Virginia,
Charlottesville, USA
M.W. Arenton, P. Barria, B. Cox, R. Hirosky, M. Joyce, A. Ledovskoy, H. Li, C.
Neu, T. Sinthuprasith, Y. Wang, E. Wolfe, F. Xia Wayne State University,
Detroit, USA
R. Harr, P.E. Karchin, N. Poudyal, J. Sturdy, P. Thapa, S. Zaleski University
of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, WI, USA
M. Brodski, J. Buchanan, C. Caillol, D. Carlsmith, S. Dasu, L. Dodd, S. Duric,
B. Gomber, M. Grothe, M. Herndon, A. Hervé, U. Hussain, P. Klabbers, A.
Lanaro, A. Levine, K. Long, R. Loveless, V. Rekovic, T. Ruggles, A. Savin, N.
Smith, W.H. Smith, N. Woods †: Deceased
1: Also at Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria
2: Also at IRFU; CEA; Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
3: Also at Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
4: Also at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
5: Also at Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil
6: Also at Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
7: Also at Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
8: Also at Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
9: Also at Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt
10: Now at Zewail City of Science and Technology, Zewail, Egypt
11: Now at British University in Egypt, Cairo, Egypt
12: Now at Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
13: Also at Department of Physics; King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi
Arabia
14: Also at Université de Haute Alsace, Mulhouse, France
15: Also at Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics; Lomonosov Moscow State
University, Moscow, Russia
16: Also at Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
17: Also at CERN; European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva,
Switzerland
18: Also at RWTH Aachen University; III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen,
Germany
19: Also at University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
20: Also at Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus, Germany
21: Also at MTA-ELTE Lendület CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group; Eötvös
Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
22: Also at Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary
23: Also at Institute of Physics; University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
24: Also at Indian Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India
25: Also at Institute of Physics, Bhubaneswar, India
26: Also at Shoolini University, Solan, India
27: Also at University of Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan, India
28: Also at University of Ruhuna, Matara, Sri Lanka
29: Also at Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran
30: Also at Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
31: Also at Plasma Physics Research Center; Science and Research Branch;
Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
32: Also at Università degli Studi di Siena, Siena, Italy
33: Also at INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca; Università di Milano-Bicocca,
Milano, Italy
34: Also at International Islamic University of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia
35: Also at Malaysian Nuclear Agency; MOSTI, Kajang, Malaysia
36: Also at Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, Mexico city, Mexico
37: Also at Warsaw University of Technology; Institute of Electronic Systems,
Warsaw, Poland
38: Also at Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia
39: Now at National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics
Institute’ (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia
40: Also at St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, St. Petersburg,
Russia
41: Also at University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
42: Also at P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
43: Also at California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA
44: Also at Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk, Russia
45: Also at Faculty of Physics; University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
46: Also at INFN Sezione di Pavia; Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy
47: Also at University of Belgrade; Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of
Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia
48: Also at Scuola Normale e Sezione dell’INFN, Pisa, Italy
49: Also at National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
50: Also at Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia
51: Also at Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
52: Also at Stefan Meyer Institute for Subatomic Physics (SMI), Vienna,
Austria
53: Also at Istanbul Aydin University, Istanbul, Turkey
54: Also at Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey
55: Also at Piri Reis University, Istanbul, Turkey
56: Also at Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey
57: Also at Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey
58: Also at Izmir Institute of Technology, Izmir, Turkey
59: Also at Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey
60: Also at Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey
61: Also at Kafkas University, Kars, Turkey
62: Also at Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey
63: Also at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
64: Also at School of Physics and Astronomy; University of Southampton,
Southampton, United Kingdom
65: Also at Monash University; Faculty of Science, Clayton, Australia
66: Also at Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, La Laguna, Spain
67: Also at Bethel University, ST. PAUL, USA
68: Also at Utah Valley University, Orem, USA
69: Also at Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
70: Also at Beykent University, Istanbul, Turkey
71: Also at Bingol University, Bingol, Turkey
72: Also at Erzincan University, Erzincan, Turkey
73: Also at Sinop University, Sinop, Turkey
74: Also at Mimar Sinan University; Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey
75: Also at Texas A&M University at Qatar, Doha, Qatar
76: Also at Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea