& 112.3\
$pp \rightarrow t\bar{t}+X \rightarrow 1l1\nu2q2b+ X$ & TTJets\_SemiLeptMGDecays\_8TeV [@CMS:MCTTSemi] & 107.2\
$pp \rightarrow t\bar{t}+X \rightarrow 4q2b+ X$ & TTJets\_HadronicMGDecays\_TuneP11mpiHi\_8TeV [@CMS:MCTTHad] & 25.8\
$pp \rightarrow WW+X \rightarrow 2l2\nu+ X$ & WWJetsTo2L2Nu\_TuneZ2star\_8TeV [@CMS:MCWW] & 5.8\
$pp \rightarrow WZ+X \rightarrow 3l1\nu+ X$ & WZJetsTo3LNu\_8TeV\_TuneZ2Star [@CMS:MCWZ] & 1.1\
$pp \rightarrow Z/\gamma^*+X \rightarrow \mu^+\mu^- + X$ & DYToMuMu\_M-20\_CT10\_TuneZ2star\_v2\_8TeV [@CMS:MCZmumu] & 1931\

\[Sec:Calibration\]Calibration
==============================

Even though the full detector simulation of CMS provides a very good description of the expected event signatures, some remaining differences in reconstruction, trigger and isolation efficiencies as well as in the momentum and energy scales and resolutions between MC simulation and data are present. Dedicated corrections are applied to minimize these differences for the relevant objects in this analysis and are discussed in the following.

The official CMS calibration and corrections for particles jets, in particular the jet energy scale (JES) and the jet energy resolution (JER), has been applied within the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bacon</span> framework. These jet corrections and uncertainties were derived from the simulation, and are confirmed with in situ measurements using the energy balance of dijet and photon+jet events [@Khachatryan:2016kdb]. A reduced set of systematic variations is used to estimate JES and JER uncertainties on the final 