Observation of Wγγ triboson production in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

Phys. Lett. B 848 (2024) 138400 Available online 14 December 2023 0370-2693/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. Funded by SCOAP³. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Physics Letters B journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/physletb Letter Observation of 𝑊𝛾𝛾 triboson production in proton-proton collisions at √𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector .The ATLAS Collaboration⋆ A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Editor: M. Doser Dataset link: https://hepdata .cedar .ac .uk This letter reports the observation of 𝑊(𝓁𝜈)𝛾𝛾 production in proton-proton collisions. This measurement uses the full Run 2 sample of events recorded at a center-of-mass energy of √𝑠=13TeV by the ATLAS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 140 fb−1. Events with a leptonically-decaying 𝑊boson and at least two photons are considered. The background-only hypothesis is rejected with an observed and expected significance of 5.6standard deviations. The inclusive fiducial production cross section of 𝑊(𝑒𝜈)𝛾𝛾 and 𝑊(𝜇𝜈)𝛾𝛾 events is measured to be 𝜎fid =13.8 ±1.1(stat)+2.1 −2.0(syst) ±0.1(lumi) fb, in agreement with the Standard Model prediction. 1. Introduction In the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics, interactions amongst electroweak gauge bosons (𝛾, 𝑊, 𝑍) are entirely determined by the non-Abelian SU(2) × U(1) structure of the electroweak sector. In particular, in proton-proton collisions, the production of a 𝑊boson in association with two photons is sensitive to triple and quartic gauge boson couplings that could be modified by the presence of new physics phenomena [1–3]. The study of this process therefore provides sensitivity to new physics that is complementary to direct searches as it can constrain new physics at energy scales that are beyond the reach of the LHC. In addition, due to the small production cross section of the 𝑊𝛾𝛾 final state in proton-proton collisions, it is only now becoming accessible with the data collected during Run 2 of the LHC. Therefore, it remains one of the least studied processes in the electroweak sector of the SM. The production of a 𝑊boson in association with two photons is also an important background in a number of other measurements, such as the production of the SM Higgs boson in association with a 𝑊 boson, followed by a 𝐻→𝛾𝛾 decay [4]. The 𝑊𝛾𝛾 triboson production is studied here through final states compatible with a leptonic decay of the 𝑊boson. A representative selection of leading-order (LO) Feynman diagrams, and a loop-induced SM Higgs boson Feynman diagram, of 𝑝𝑝 →𝓁𝜈𝛾𝛾 production are shown in Fig. 1. These Feynman diagrams illustrate four of the many possible production modes, and include processes where the photons are produced via: (a) a 𝑊𝑊𝛾𝛾 quartic gauge coupling; (b) two 𝑊𝑊𝛾 triple gauge couplings; (c) initial (ISR) and final (FSR) state radiation; and (d) as the decay products of a Higgs boson. Production of 𝑊𝛾𝛾 via a ⋆E-mail address: atlas .publications @cern .ch. SM Higgs boson is treated as background in this analysis to isolate the signal processes to those with only electroweak gauge boson interactions. Although there are contributions from processes with one or more FSR photons (see diagram (c)), the process will nevertheless be referred to as 𝑊𝛾𝛾 throughout this letter for simplicity. The largest sources of background in this analysis consist of events in which at least one of the reconstructed objects in the final state is misidentified. Data-driven techniques, described in Section 5, are used to estimate these sources of reducible background, which include photons from misidentified jets or neutral hadron decays, electrons misidentified as photons, leptons from misidentified jets or heavyflavored hadron decays, and events in which one or both photons do not originate from the primary vertex. In addition, a small fraction of background events originates from multiboson (𝑊𝐻(𝛾𝛾), 𝑊𝑊𝛾, 𝑍𝛾𝛾) and top-quark production (𝑡𝑡𝛾, 𝑡𝑊 𝛾, 𝑡𝑞𝛾). Monte Carlo (MC) simulated samples, described in Section 3, are used to estimate the yield of these sources of irreducible background. To maximize the analysis sensitivity, the uncertainty on background yield from 𝑡𝑡𝛾 production is constrained from data in a control region (TopCR) that does not overlap with the signal region of interest. Previous measurements of the 𝑊𝛾𝛾 process were performed at the LHC using proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of √𝑠= 8TeV with the ATLAS [5]and CMS [6] detectors, and at √𝑠=13TeV with the CMS [7] detector, resulting in a maximum observed statistical significance of 3.1𝜎. This letter presents the observation of the 𝑊𝛾𝛾 process and a measurement of its fiducial cross section in the 𝑊→𝑒𝜈 and 𝑊→𝜇𝜈 decay channels. In order to obtain a precise background https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138400 Received 8 August 2023; Received in revised form 29 November 2023; Accepted 11 December 2023 Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 2 The ATLAS Collaboration Fig. 1. Representative Feynman diagrams for the production of 𝑊𝛾𝛾. estimate, the electron and muon channels are combined for both the observation and fiducial cross section measurement. The 𝑝𝑝 →𝑊𝛾𝛾 signal strength 𝜇, defined as the ratio of the observed signal yield to the expected yield, is measured to assess the compatibility between data and SM prediction. Results are obtained based on the analysis of  = 140 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data collected with the ATLAS detector at √𝑠=13TeV, allowing for improvement over the previous ATLAS result due to both the increase in integrated luminosity and the increase in production cross section, in addition to improvements to the data-driven background estimates. 2. ATLAS detector The ATLAS experiment [8]at the LHC is a multipurpose particle detector with a cylindrical geometry, forward–backward symmetric, and a near 4𝜋coverage in solid angle.1It consists of an inner tracking detector (ID) surrounded by a thin superconducting solenoid providing a 2Taxial magnetic field, electromagnetic and hadron calorimeters, and 1ATLAS uses a right-handed coordinate system with its origin at the nominal interaction point (IP) in the center of the detector and the 𝑧-axis along the beam pipe. The 𝑥-axis points from the IP to the center of the LHC ring, and the 𝑦-axis points upwards. Cylindrical coordinates (𝑟, 𝜙)are used in the transverse plane, 𝜙being the azimuthal angle around the 𝑧-axis. The pseudorapidity is defined in terms of the polar angle 𝜃as 𝜂=− ln tan(𝜃∕2). Angular distance is measured in units of Δ𝑅 ≡√(Δ𝜂)2+(Δ𝜙)2. a muon spectrometer (MS). The inner tracking detector covers the pseudorapidity range |𝜂| <2.5. It consists of silicon pixel, silicon microstrip, and transition radiation tracking detectors. Lead/liquid-argon (LAr) sampling calorimeters provide electromagnetic (EM) energy measurements with high granularity. A steel/scintillator-tile hadron calorimeter covers the central pseudorapidity range (|𝜂| <1.7). The endcap and forward regions are instrumented with LAr calorimeters for both the EM and hadronic energy measurements up to |𝜂| =4.9. The muon spectrometer surrounds the calorimeters and is based on three large superconducting air-core toroidal magnets with eight coils each. The magnetic field line integral of the toroidal magnets ranges between 2.0 and 6.0Tm across most of the detector. The muon spectrometer includes a system of precision tracking chambers and fast detectors for triggering. A two-level trigger system is used to select events. The first-level trigger is implemented in hardware and uses a subset of the detector information to accept events at a rate below 100 kHz. This is followed by a software-based trigger that reduces the accepted event rate to 1kHz on average depending on the data-taking conditions. An extensive software suite [9]is used in the reconstruction and analysis of real and simulated data, in detector operations, and in the trigger and data acquisition systems of the experiment. 3. Data and simulation The measurement presented in this letter is based on proton-proton collision data at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV recorded by the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the LHC (2015-2018). During this Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 3 The ATLAS Collaboration data-taking period, the number of interactions per proton bunch crossing (pileup) averaged between 13 and 38 interactions, depending on the year [10]. After applying ATLAS data quality requirements [11], the dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of  = 140 fb−1. The uncertainty in the combined integrated luminosity for 2015-2018 is 0.83% [12], obtained using the LUCID-2 detector [13]for the primary luminosity measurements, complemented by measurements using the ID and calorimeters. Simulated samples are used to model the expected signal and irreducible background yields, while reducible backgrounds from misidentified objects are estimated using data-driven techniques described in Section 5. Some of the irreducible backgrounds, as listed in Section 1, contribute to the analysis only when one lepton is not reconstructed or additional photons are present due to FSR. Signal 𝑒𝜈𝛾𝛾, 𝜇𝜈𝛾𝛾, and 𝜏𝜈𝛾𝛾 processes are generated with SHERPA 2.2.10 [14] generator using next-to-leading-order (NLO) matrix elements (ME) with zero partons, and leading-order (LO) matrix elements for up to two partons calculated with the Comix [15]and OpenLoop [16–18] libraries. They were matched with the SHERPA parton shower [19]using the MEPS@NLO prescription [20–23]using the set of tuned parameters developed by the SHERPA authors. The NNPDF3.0NNLO next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) parton distribution function (PDF) set from the NNPDF Collaboration [24]was used. Approximate NLO electroweak corrections are included in these samples [25]and result in a negligible effect in the 𝑊𝛾𝛾 phase space used in this measurement. The 𝑊𝐻(𝛾𝛾)background is estimated from events generated with the POWHEG-BOX V2[26] generator interfaced with PYTHIA 8.212 [27,28]using the AZNLO tune [29]for parton showering modeling and NLO PDFs from NNPDF3.0. Background contributions from 𝑊𝑊𝛾 (SHERPA 2.2.11), 𝑍𝛾𝛾 (SHERPA 2.2.10), and 𝑍𝛾 (SHERPA 2.2.8) processes are estimated from samples generated to NLO accuracy in perturbative QCD with up to 1 additional parton emission, and merged with samples to LO accuracy in perturbative QCD with 2 to 3 parton emissions; like the signal samples, these are generated with the NNLO PDF set from NNPDF3.0NNLO. Double counting between 𝑍𝛾 and 𝑍𝛾𝛾 is removed at the event generation stage. Contributions from 𝑡 𝑡𝛾 events, 𝑡𝑊 𝛾 events where the photon is produced in the 𝑡𝑊 decay chain, and 𝑡𝑞𝛾 events are generated with MADGRAPH5_AMC@NLO 2.3.3 [30]. The NNPDF2.3LO [31]PDF sets and parton shower modeling from PYTHIA 8.212 with the A14 tune [32]are used in the generation of these event samples. Contributions from 𝑡𝑊 𝛾 events where the photon is produced at matrix-element level are generated with MADGRAPH5_AMC@NLO 2.6.7, NNPDF2.3LO PDF sets, and parton shower modeling from PYTHIA 8.244 with the A14 tune. In all simulated samples where the production of one photon is generated in the matrix element, a second prompt photon can be produced as FSR in the parton shower. Both signal and background MC events are processed through the full ATLAS detector simulation [33]based on GEANT4 [34]. The effects of multiple interactions in the same and neighboring bunch crossings are modeled by overlaying the simulated hard-scattering event with inelastic proton–proton events generated with PYTHIA 8.186 [27]using the NNPDF2.3LO set of PDFs [31]and the A3 set of tuned parameters [35]. Simulated events are weighted such that the pileup distribution reproduces the pileup distribution of the dataset used in this measurement. 4. Event selection The 𝑊𝛾𝛾 process is investigated using the leptonic decays of the 𝑊boson. While events with a leptonic 𝜏decay to an electron or a muon are considered as signal events, those with hadronic 𝜏decays are considered as a background. Candidate 𝑊(𝓁𝜈)𝛾𝛾 events therefore contain two isolated photons, an isolated electron or muon, and missing transverse momentum, with magnitude referred to as missing transverse energy (𝐸miss T), from the undetected neutrino(s) originating from the leptonic 𝑊boson decays. The following paragraphs describe the selection requirements used to define the signal region (SR) of the measurement. Events used for this measurement are selected using a suite of triggers that require the presence of at least two photons with 𝑝T> 10 GeV and at least one electron or muon with 𝑝T> 20 GeV [36,37]. For the 2017-2018 data-taking period, the 𝑝Tthresholds used to select events with at least two photons and at least one electron were increased to 12 GeV (photons) and 24 GeV (electron). In addition to these triggers, single and di-lepton triggers with 𝑝Tthresholds between 14 and 26 GeV are used to select events for the data-driven background estimates. The overall efficiencies for these triggers to select simulated signal events in the signal region are 95% in the electron channel and 82% in the muon channel. In all cases, trigger objects must be matched to reconstructed objects selected for analysis. Events are required to have a primary vertex associated with at least two charged-particle tracks with 𝑝T>0.5GeV in the proton-proton interaction region. If multiple vertices satisfy these criteria, the vertex with the highest 𝑝2 Tsum is selected. Photon candidates are reconstructed from clusters of energy deposits in the EM calorimeter, calibrated at the EM scale, and tracking information from the ID, which is used to classify candidates as either converted or unconverted photons. Candidate photons are required to have a transverse momentum 𝑝T>20 GeV and a pseudorapidity of |𝜂| <2.37, excluding the transition region between the electromagnetic barrel and endcap regions of the calorimeter, 1.37 <|𝜂| <1.52. Photons must also satisfy the cut-based Tight identification requirement defined using EM shower shape variables [38]. To reject non-prompt photons originating from jets, photons must satisfy an isolation requirement based on topological clusters [39]of energy deposits in the EM calorimeter. The isolation energy of a photon, 𝐸iso,𝛾 T, is determined by first calculating the scalar sum of the transverse energy of topological clusters within Δ𝑅 =0.4of a photon (𝐸cone T), corrected for the energy of the photon itself, and then subtracting off a value that depends on the transverse photon energy (𝐸𝛾 T), such that 𝐸iso,𝛾 T=𝐸cone T−0.022 ∗𝐸𝛾 T. Photons are required to pass the Calorimeter-Only Tight isolation working point [38], which requires 𝐸iso,𝛾 T<2.45 GeV. In addition, the two photons must be separated from each other by requiring Δ𝑅 >0.4. Electron candidates are reconstructed from energy deposits in the EM calorimeter that can be matched to ID tracks. These tracks must be consistent with originating from the primary vertex by requiring that |𝑑0∕𝜎𝑑0| <5and |𝑧0⋅sin(𝜃)| <0.5mm, where 𝑑0is the transverse impact parameter relative to the beam line and 𝜎𝑑0is its uncertainty, 𝑧0is the longitudinal impact parameter, and 𝜃is the polar angle of the track with respect to the beamline. Electron candidates are required to have 𝑝T>25 GeV and |𝜂| <2.47, excluding the region 1.37 <|𝜂| <1.52. Additionally, they must satisfy the likelihood-based Medium identification requirement defined using inputs from the calorimetry and tracking systems [40]. Muon candidates are reconstructed by matching tracks in the ID to tracks in the MS. These tracks must be consistent with originating from primary vertices by requiring |𝑑0∕𝜎𝑑0| <3and |𝑧0⋅sin(𝜃)| <0.5mm. Muon candidates are further required to have 𝑝T>25 GeV and |𝜂| <2.4, and must satisfy the Medium identification requirement [41]based on the quality and compatibility of their tracks in the ID and MS. To further distinguish signal leptons from background, isolation variables for calorimeter energy deposits (𝐸iso T) and tracks (𝑝iso T) are constructed. The calorimeter isolation 𝐸iso Tis defined as the scalar sum of the transverse energy of topological clusters within Δ𝑅 =0.2of the lepton, which is corrected for both the energy of the lepton itself and the average pileup energy density measured in this region of the detector. For electrons (muons), the track-based isolation 𝑝iso T,𝑒(𝑝iso T,𝜇) is defined as the scalar sum of tracks with 𝑝T>1GeV within a 𝑝T-dependent cone up to Δ𝑅 =0.2(Δ𝑅 =0.3) of the lepton, with the lepton candidate re- Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 4 The ATLAS Collaboration moved. Electrons must satisfy 𝐸iso T∕𝑝T<0.06 and 𝑝iso T,𝑒∕𝑝T<0.06 [40], and muons must satisfy 𝐸iso T∕𝑝T<0.15 and 𝑝iso T,𝜇∕𝑝T<0.04 [42]. Hadronic jets are used in the SR definition to veto events with jets containing 𝑏-hadrons. Jets are reconstructed using the anti-𝑘𝑡algorithm [43]with a distance parameter Δ𝑅 =0.4. The inputs to the jet algorithm are particle-flow objects [44], which make use of both the calorimeter and the ID information to precisely determine the momenta of the input particles. Reconstructed jets are required to have 𝑝T>20 GeV and |𝜂| <4.5. Jets satisfying 20 <𝑝 T<60 GeV and |𝜂| <2.4 must pass the Tight requirement on the jet vertex tagger variable [45]in order to suppress jets not originating from the primary vertex. Kinematic properties of 𝑏-flavored hadrons are used as input to a multivariate jet classification algorithm [46,47]. This multivariate classification has a 77% efficiency and is used to identify jets with |𝜂| <2.5containing 𝑏-flavored hadrons. Events with jets containing 𝑏-flavored hadrons are rejected. It is possible for tracks and energy deposits to be associated with more than one type of reconstructed object. To remove the overlap between different reconstructed objects in an event, the following selection criteria are applied in the order in which they are described: electrons are removed if they share an ID track with a muon; photons are removed if they are within Δ𝑅 =0.4of an electron or a muon; jets are removed if they are within Δ𝑅 =0.2of an electron; electrons are removed if they are within Δ𝑅 =0.4of a jet; jets are removed if they are within Δ𝑅 =0.2of a muon; and finally photons and muons are removed if they are within Δ𝑅 =0.4of the remaining jets in the event. The magnitude and direction of the missing transverse momentum are reconstructed using calibrated photons, electrons, muons, jets, and tracks from charged particles not associated to any object found in the event [48]. An ambiguity resolution procedure is performed as part of the calculation to ensure that energy deposits reconstructed as different objects are not double-counted. Events in the SR are required to satisfy 𝐸miss T>25 GeV. Additionally, the transverse mass of the 𝑊boson 𝑚𝑊 T=√2𝑝𝓁 T𝐸miss T(1 − cosΔ𝜙)is required to be greater than 40 GeV, where Δ𝜙is defined as the difference in azimuthal angles between the lepton momentum and missing transverse momentum. A set of 𝑍𝛾 veto requirements are implemented to greatly reduce the number of 𝑍𝛾 events passing the signal selection, which can occur when an electron is misidentified as a photon. All SR events must have 𝑝T,𝓁𝛾𝛾 >30 GeV and 𝑚𝓁𝛾𝛾, 𝑚𝓁𝛾1, and 𝑚𝓁𝛾2∉[82, 100] GeV, where 𝛾1and 𝛾2are the leading and sub-leading photons ordered by 𝑝T. The 𝑍𝛾 veto is applied to both the electron and muon channels to ensure a consistent event selection. To reduce contributions from background events with a second lepton originating from processes with two 𝑊bosons or a 𝑍boson, two additional selection criteria are applied. Events are rejected if they contain a second lepton, selected without the |𝑑0∕𝜎𝑑0|or isolation requirements, of a different lepton flavor to the primary lepton that passes all SR selection criteria. A similar veto is enforced for events containing same-flavor leptons with the secondary lepton only required to satisfy 𝑝T>6GeV and pass Loose (Medium) identification for electrons [40] (muons [41]), where the lepton identification requirement is loosened to remove a significant fraction of the prompt background from the 𝑍𝛾𝛾 process. Differences in the reconstruction, trigger, and selection efficiencies for leptons and photons between data and simulation are corrected for with scale factors [36,37,42,49]. In addition to the SR defined in this section, other data samples are used to estimate backgrounds coming from misidentified objects using data-driven techniques, as described in Section 5. 5. Background estimation The largest background in the 𝑊𝛾𝛾 SR consists of events in which one or both signal photons originate from a misidentified jet or neutral hadron decay. This hadronic fake photon background, denoted as 𝑗→𝛾, is estimated using a data-driven method by performing a twodimensional template fit to the isolation distributions of the leading and subleading photons in a procedure similar to those discussed in Refs. [5] and [50]. The three isolation distribution templates for the cases in which either the leading, subleading, or both photons are 𝑗→𝛾fakes are obtained from data in regions formed by loosening and inverting some of the leading, subleading, or both photon isolation requirements, respectively, in order to enhance the contributions from misidentified jets. This is done by selecting events in which at least one photon candidate passes the Loose photon identification requirement but fails one or more of the four EM shower-shape requirements used in the Tight (T) photon identification [38]; these are denoted as L′photons [49]. For the estimation of this source of background, events are still required to satisfy all other SR criteria except the photon isolation requirement. The electron and muon channels are combined to ensure a sufficient number of events pass selection requirements for the data samples. These events are categorized into four non-overlapping data samples, TT, TL′, L′T, and L′L′, depending whether the T or L′photon identification criteria are satisfied by the leading and subleading photons, respectively. Templates for non-prompt leading and subleading photons are built using one-dimensional Bukin functions [51], and their shape parameters are determined from fits to photon isolation energy distributions of data events in the L′T and TL′regions, respectively. The templates for leading (subleading) prompt photons are formed from double-sided crystal ball functions, whose shape parameters are fit to simulated tight leading (subleading) prompt photons in simulated 𝑊𝛾𝛾 events; these correspond to leading photons from events in the TT and TL′regions and subleading photons from events in the TT and L′T regions. Two-dimensional templates for prompt 𝛾𝛾, 𝛾(𝑗→𝛾), and (𝑗→𝛾)𝛾 events are formed by taking the product of the two functions used to individually describe the isolation energy of the leading and subleading photons. Due to non-negligible correlations between the two photon candidates in the L′L′data sample, the two-dimensional template for (𝑗→𝛾)(𝑗→𝛾)events is instead formed by fitting a superposition of Gaussian kernels [52]. Finally, coefficients corresponding to numbers of events for each of the four, two-dimensional templates are fit using an extended maximum likelihood fit to data in the TT region that has simulated events from all other background processes with two prompt photons and one prompt lepton subtracted. The coefficients for the TL′, L′T, and L′L′regions are further corrected for signal leakage using MC simulation. In order to account for the photon isolation energy requirements that are part of the SR definition, the contribution from 𝑗→𝛾 fake events in the SR is obtained by integrating the 2D photon isolation energy distributions fitted to data in the TT region up to the cut value that defines the SR, 𝐸iso,𝛾 T=2.45 GeV. The total expected number of 𝑗→𝛾background events is determined by computing the sum of the integrated coefficients of the 𝛾(𝑗→𝛾), (𝑗→𝛾)𝛾, and (𝑗→𝛾)(𝑗→𝛾) templates. A systematic uncertainty due to the choice of photon 𝐿′ identification is estimated by forming 𝑗→𝛾templates with alternative identification working points and parameterizing the shape differences as uncertainties on the nominal Bukin template parameters. Statistical and systematic uncertainties on the templates are propagated through to the background estimates using a multivariate Gaussian constraint on the two-dimensional fit, resulting in an overall 11% systematic uncertainty on this background. Events in which one or both photons are misidentified electrons constitute the 𝑒 →𝛾fake background. These misidentifications are caused mainly by tracking inefficiencies and the mismatching of tracks in the ID to energy clusters in the EM calorimeter. The background is estimated using a data-driven “fake-factor” method similar to the one described in Ref. [38]. The 𝑒 →𝛾fake rate is calculated with a tagand-probe approach using both 𝑍→𝑒𝑒 and 𝑍→𝑒𝛾𝑒events, where 𝛾𝑒 symbolizes a misreconstructed electron identified as a photon. Probe electrons are selected with 𝑝T>20 GeV, the likelihood-based Tight identification [40], and the same isolation requirement as SR electrons, such Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 5 The ATLAS Collaboration that their kinematics selection is close to the one for the photons used in the SR. The data sample used to calculate the 𝑒 →𝛾fake rate consists of events selected with single electron triggers that have a reconstructed 𝑒𝑒∕𝑒𝛾𝑒invariant mass within 20 GeV of the 𝑍boson mass, 91.2 GeV. Non-resonant backgrounds in this data sample are modeled using an exponential function, and the 𝑍boson resonance is modeled by a Gaussian with double-sided exponential tails [53]. The number of 𝑒𝑒 (𝑁𝑒𝑒) and 𝑒𝛾𝑒(𝑁𝑒𝛾𝑒) events are extracted using a combined signal and background fit to the invariant mass distributions in bins of 𝑝Tand 𝜂, and the fake factor is computed as 𝑓𝑒→𝛾𝑒=𝑁𝑒𝛾𝑒∕𝑁𝑒𝑒. To estimate the 𝑒 →𝛾 background in the SR, this fake factor is applied to a sample of 𝑊(𝓁𝜈)𝑒𝛾 events obtained by selecting data events with di-lepton triggers and substituting one SR photon requirement for that of a probe electron. Systematic uncertainties relating to the fitting and integration ranges around the 𝑍-boson mass, the photon energy calibration, and the exponential background are propagated to the 𝑒 →𝛾background estimate. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are 2% and 7%, respectively, on the final SR 𝑒 →𝛾background estimate. A validation region dominated by events with 𝑒 →𝛾fakes is obtained by inverting the 𝑍𝛾-veto in the SR and in the 𝑊(𝓁𝜈)𝑒𝛾 region. The background estimation method is shown to reproduce data in both of these validation regions. The hadronic fake lepton background, 𝑗→𝓁, is comprised of events in which the signal lepton is either a misidentified jet or from the decay of a heavy-flavored hadron (non-prompt). This background is also estimated using a data-driven fake-factor [54]using an event sample that is enriched in non-prompt leptons. This data sample is obtained by selecting 𝑍(𝓁𝓁) +𝓁𝑗events with single lepton triggers where the third lepton, 𝓁𝑗, is a misreconstructed jet. Two leptons must have an invariant mass within 10% of the 𝑍-boson mass and be of the same flavor but opposite charge, while the third (probe) lepton must be of a different lepton flavor in order to avoid ambiguity. Additional requirements of 𝐸miss T<40 GeV and 𝑚𝑊 T<40 GeV are imposed to reduce prompt leptons from 𝑊𝑍 events, and remaining 𝑊𝑍 events are subtracted from the data, relying on simulated predictions. The fake factor is defined as the ratio of the number of probe leptons satisfying the SR lepton criteria (𝑁SR), to the number of probe leptons satisfying a Loose set of criteria (𝑁𝑙). This Loose criterion selects leptons more likely to be non-prompt by inverting the lepton |𝑑0∕𝜎𝑑0|and isolation requirements. The fake factor is estimated in bins of probe lepton 𝑝Tand |𝜂|for electrons, and only in bins of 𝑝Tfor muons due to statistical limitations. The 𝑗→𝓁fake background in the SR is estimated by applying the fake factor to a region kinematically adjacent to the SR. This region is defined with the same selection requirements as for the SR with the exception of the lepton selection, which uses the Loose selection criteria. Statistical and systematic uncertainties account for a 26% (27%) and 18% (50%) uncertainty in the electron (muon) channel, respectively. Systematic uncertainties relating to a bias in the control region due to the 𝐸miss Tselection are computed by varying the requirement by ±10 GeV [54], and theoretical uncertainties on the subtracted 𝑊𝑍 events are propagated through to the fake factors. The method is validated in a region enriched in fake leptons obtained by inverting the 𝐸miss Tand 𝑚𝑊 Trequirements used in the SR and comparing the estimate to data. The pileup background consists of events in which one or both photons do not originate from the primary vertex, mainly due to a limited photon pointing resolution. The fraction of photons originating from a pileup vertex is calculated in a subset of SR data where at least one photon is converted. Since the fraction of photons that convert is independent of their production vertex, the relative fractions of signal and pileup photons in the converted sample is representative of the fractional number of signal and pileup photons in the full SR. Converted photons that are required to have at least one ID track with silicon hits [49]and a conversion radius, defined as the radial distance of the conversion vertex, of less than 400 mm are used for this estimate because the presence of an ID track allows for the calculation of a longitudinal impact parameter. The difference between the longitudinal impact parameters of the converted photon and the primary vertex, Δ𝑧, is Gaussian-distributed and expected to be close to zero for photons from the hard scatter, while pileup photons are expected to have a much broader distribution [55]. The |Δ𝑧|>55 mm tails of the distribution are used to estimate the fraction of pileup photons in the SR. The statistical uncertainty on the pileup background is 56%, due to the limited number of events in the estimation region. Event yields in the SR from irreducible sources of background such as 𝑊𝐻(𝛾𝛾), 𝑊𝑊𝛾, and 𝑍𝛾𝛾 as well as 𝑡𝑡𝛾, 𝑡𝑊 𝛾, and 𝑡𝑞𝛾 are estimated using MC simulated samples. To further reduce uncertainties from the estimated 𝑡𝑡𝛾 event yield in the SR, a control region enhanced in 𝑡𝑡𝛾 events (TopCR) is defined by inverting the 𝑏-jet veto in the SR selection requirements in order to constrain a 𝑡𝑡𝛾 normalization factor that is left floating in the likelihood fit described in Section 7. The fitted 𝑡𝑡𝛾 normalization factor is cross-checked in a validation region (TopVR) formed by inverting the 𝑏-jet veto, the 𝐸miss T, and 𝑚𝑊 Tin the SR selection requirements in order to select events with at least one 𝑏-jet, 𝐸miss T<25 GeV, and 𝑚𝑊 T<40 GeV. The 𝑗→𝛾and 𝑒 →𝛾data-driven backgrounds are also computed in the TopCR and TopVR following the same methods outlined for the SR. Due to the reduced number of events in the L′regions, the photon identification systematic uncertainty is estimated using a dedicated procedure in the SR, and is +18%∕ −13%. The 𝑗→𝓁and pileup backgrounds are negligible in both of these TopCR and TopVR regions. 6. Uncertainties The background uncertainties described in Section 5are the dominant uncertainties of this measurement described in Section 7. In addition, several other important sources of uncertainty are assessed. These include instrumental uncertainties such as the energy scale and resolution of electrons and photons [49]; photon and lepton trigger, reconstruction, identification, and isolation efficiencies [36,37,41,49]; jet energy scale and resolution [56]; jet vertex tagging [57,58]; 𝑏-jet identification [46]; missing transverse energy reconstruction [59]; and the luminosity of the dataset [12]. These are evaluated for both backgrounds and signal processes. Additionally, theoretical uncertainties associated with the simulation of the signal and background processes are evaluated and propagated through to the measured fiducial cross section. Theoretical uncertainties on the background processes, but not signal processes, are propagated through to the measured signal strength. These include parton distribution function uncertainties [60]; the uncertainty on the strong coupling constant, 𝛼s[61]; and missing higher-order terms in the cross section calculations [62]. The last is evaluated by varying the renormalization and factorization scales independently by factors of 0.5 and 2, avoiding variations where the two scales differ by more than a factor of two. Statistical uncertainties on the data, and signal and background MC samples are also taken into account. All of the previously described uncertainties are accounted for in the detector-to-fiducial region correction factor used for the unfolding procedure detailed in Section 7. 7. Results The 𝑝𝑝 →𝑊𝛾𝛾 signal strength 𝜇is extracted from the data using a binned maximum likelihood fit [63,64] including the TopCR and the signal region. All uncertainties considered in the analysis are treated as nuisance parameters in the fit. Systematic uncertainties are constrained by Gaussian functions, and correlations between sources of systematic uncertainties are taken into account. Statistical uncertainties are also treated as nuisance parameters but are constrained by assigning a Poisson function to each analysis bin. These constraints penalize the likelihood fit if the estimated nuisance parameters pull from their measured values. Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 6 The ATLAS Collaboration Fig. 2. Data, and preand post-fit yields for TopCR as a function of leading photon 𝑝T, and for TopVR and SR each as a single bin. The error bars on data indicate its statistical uncertainty. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the post-fit yield (black points) and the ratio of the pre-fit yield to the post-fit yield (solid line) for each of the regions. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties obtained from the fit. The 𝑡𝑡𝛾 background is scaled by the normalization factor 𝛼𝑡𝑡𝛾 , and the 𝑊(𝓁𝜈)𝛾𝛾 prediction, by the signal strength 𝜇. Background contributions from pileup in TopCR and TopVR are neglected. Table 1 Estimated signal and background yields in the SR and TopCR, as well as their sums, are shown post-fit together with the observed number of events in data. The uncertainties quoted in the table correspond to total uncertainties. Events from the “Multiboson” and “Top” backgrounds are estimated from MC simulation and contain only prompt leptons and photons. Yields denoted with “–” correspond to backgrounds that are negligible. Source SR TopCR 𝑊𝛾𝛾 410±60 28±5 Non-prompt 𝑗→𝛾420±50 42±20 Misidentified 𝑒→𝛾155±11 120±9 Multiboson (𝑊𝐻(𝛾𝛾),𝑊𝑊𝛾,𝑍𝛾𝛾)76±13 5.2±1.7 Non-prompt 𝑗→𝓁35±10 – Top (𝑡𝑡𝛾,𝑡𝑊 𝛾,𝑡𝑞𝛾)30±7 136±32 Pileup 10±5– Total 1136±34 332±18 Data 1136 333 The TopCR is used to determine a 𝑡𝑡𝛾 background2normalization factor 𝛼𝑡𝑡𝛾 . The normalization factor is allowed to float via a likelihood scan done simultaneously with the signal-strength extraction in the SR. The fit value of 𝛼𝑡𝑡𝛾 is then applied in the TopVR and the resulting total estimated yield is compared to data. Fig. 2illustrates the yields for the three regions TopCR, TopVR, and SR. The estimated yield in the TopVR region shows agreement with data. Table 1shows the post-fit yields of the signal and estimated backgrounds in the SR and TopCR, along with their sum and the number of selected data events. The signal strength and 𝑡𝑡𝛾 normalization are determined to be 𝜇=1.01+0.17 −0.16 and 𝛼𝑡𝑡𝛾 =0.83+0.21 −0.25 and have been applied to the post-fit results. Assuming lepton universality and correct modeling of 𝜏-to-𝑒and 𝜏-to-𝜇decays, events from 𝑊(𝜏𝜈)𝛾𝛾 with leptonic 𝜏 decays that fall into the fit regions are included as a part of the signal in the fitting procedure and are normalized together with 𝑊(𝑒𝜈)𝛾𝛾 and 𝑊(𝜇𝜈)𝛾𝛾. The fit results yield an expected and observed significance of 5.6 standard deviations, corresponding to the observation of the 𝑊𝛾𝛾 process. No nuisance parameters are significantly pulled or constrained in the fit. In order to obtain an unfolded production cross section measurement, a fiducial phase space is defined to be as close as possible to the 2Background from top processes 𝑡𝑊 𝛾 and 𝑡𝑞𝛾 are small and are thus not included in the determination and application of 𝛼𝑡𝑡𝛾 . SR event sample selected at detector-level. Fiducial requirements are applied to dressed leptons, which are particle-level electrons and muons recombined with radiated photons within a cone of Δ𝑅 =0.1. Events are required to have a dressed electron or muon with 𝑝T>25 GeV and |𝜂| <2.47 while the two particle-level photons must satisfy 𝑝T>20 GeV and |𝜂| <2.37. Additionally, photons must satisfy the isolation requirement (𝐸cone, gen. T−0.032 ×𝐸T) <6.53 GeV, where 𝐸cone, gen. Tis computed from the vector momentum sum of all stable, generator-level particles within Δ𝑅 =0.4of the photon. This isolation requirement is derived to vary with photon 𝐸Tto mimic the detector-level isolation requirement. Additionally, two separation requirements are applied to the two photons and between the lepton and each photon: Δ𝑅𝛾𝛾 >0.4 and Δ𝑅𝓁𝛾>0.4. Finally, fiducial events must satisfy 𝐸miss T>25 GeV, 𝑚𝑊 T>40 GeV, and a veto on 𝑏-jets with 𝑝T>20 GeV and |𝜂| <2.5. The unfolding is performed into a fiducial phase space with 𝑊→𝜇𝜈 and 𝑊→𝑒𝜈 decays; 𝑊→𝜏𝜈 decays that pass these requirements, including events in which the tau decays leptonically, are not considered as part of the fiducial phase space. Unfolding is performed on the measurement using a similar maximum likelihood method to the one used to perform the signal-strength extraction, where the effects of statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties on the modeling of the correction from detector-level signal events to the fiducial phase space are taken into account. A correction factor 𝐶is calculated as the ratio of the number of signal MC events reconstructed in the signal region to the predicted in the fiducial phase-space. The number of detector-level events is defined as the sum of simulated MC events with two photons and 𝑊-boson decaying into an electron, muon, or leptonically decaying tau that pass all signal region requirements. The number of fiducial events is calculated using only simulated 𝑊(𝑒𝜈)𝛾𝛾 and 𝑊(𝜇𝜈)𝛾𝛾 signal MC events, where the electron or muon is prompt. The correction factor is computed to be 𝐶=0.210 ±0.004(stat.)using the SHERPA NLO signal MC samples; a 2.9% relative difference is found when calculating 𝐶with MADGRAPH signal MC samples, which is in statistical agreement and thus no generator choice uncertainty is added. In the likelihood fit, the total number of expected signal events is defined as 𝑁sig =𝐶𝜎 𝑒∕𝜇 pred. The signal production cross section is measured in the fiducial phase space from the number of signal events observed in data, the integrated luminosity, and the correction factor. The measured fiducial cross section for 𝑊(𝑒∕𝜇𝜈)𝛾𝛾 events is determined to be 𝜎fid = 13.8 ±1.1(stat)+2.1 −2.0(syst) ±0.1(lumi) fb and it is in close agreement with SM predictions as shown in Fig. 3. Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 7 The ATLAS Collaboration Fig. 3. The measured fiducial 𝑊(→𝑒𝜈∕𝜇𝜈)𝛾𝛾 integrated cross section compared with both the signal event generator predictions. Table 2 Major sources of uncertainty and their impacts on the measured fiducial cross section, as calculated from the correlation matrix of the fiducial cross section fit. Squared values of impacts are determined by setting all nuisance parameters for a given uncertainty source to their best-fit value and subtracting the resulting squared value of the total uncertainty from the squared value of the total uncertainty in the nominal fit. Systematic uncertainty sources that contribute less than 0.1% are not shown. Efficiency uncertainties include, where applicable, uncertainties on data-MC agreement due to reconstruction, trigger selection, identification, isolation, and vertex-matching. Source of uncertainty Impact [%] 𝑗→𝛾data-driven background estimate 12 Photon efficiency 4.5 Other data-driven background estimates 3.5 Background MC theoretical modeling 3.0 Monte Carlo statistics 2.7 Signal MC theoretical modeling 2.6 Jet efficiency and calibration 2.4 Top normalization 2.3 Pileup reweighting 1.6 Muon efficiency and calibration 1.4 𝐸miss Tcalibration 1.3 Luminosity 1.0 Electron and photon calibration 0.7 Flavor tagging efficiency 0.6 Systematic 15 Statistical 8.3 Total 17 In Table 2, the dominant sources of uncertainty and their impact on the fiducial cross section are listed. For the purposes of this table, the uncertainties are grouped into common categories given their source. The impact of each group of systematic uncertainties is calculated by performing the likelihood fit where the individual parameters of the grouped systematics are set to their best fit values from the nominal fit and not allowed to float. For each grouping, the square value of the new overall fit uncertainty is subtracted from the squared value of the nominal fit uncertainty to obtain the squared value of the impact of the grouped uncertainties. The fit is performed under the assumption that the nuisance parameters for the grouped systematics that are held fixed are uncorrelated to all others that are allowed to float. This procedure is used only to estimate the impact of the individual groups of systematics, as it avoids the possibility of abnormal pulls that could occur if the fit were performed with only one group of nuisance parameters left floating at a time. The largest source of systematic uncertainty is due to the 𝑗→𝛾data-driven background estimate, followed by the statistical uncertainty on data. The modeling of the identification, isolation, and trigger efficiencies to select photons in simulated 𝑊𝛾𝛾 events also represents a substantial source of uncertainty, and together these comprise the “Photon efficiency” uncertainty source in Table 2. 8. Conclusion This letter reports the observation and measurement of the process 𝑝𝑝 →𝑊(𝓁𝜈)𝛾𝛾 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. Leptonic decays of the 𝑊boson to an electron or a muon accompanied by two photons are selected from the 140 fb−1 Run 2 dataset of proton-proton collisions at √𝑠=13TeV produced by the LHC. A maximum likelihood fit of the signal and background yields leads to a rejection of the backgroundonly hypothesis with an observed and expected significance of 5.6 standard deviations. The measured fiducial cross section for 𝑊(𝑒𝜈)𝛾𝛾 and 𝑊(𝜇𝜈)𝛾𝛾 events is 𝜎fid = 13.8 ±1.1(stat)+2.1 −2.0(syst) ±0.1(lumi) fb, in agreement with the SM predictions for these processes. The dominant sources of uncertainty come from the data-driven background estimates and the statistical uncertainty on data. Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Data availability The data for this manuscript are not available. The values in the plots and tables associated to this article are stored in HEPDATA (https://hepdata .cedar .ac .uk). Acknowledgements We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; ANID, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; Minciencias, Colombia; MEYS CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS and CEADRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, HGF and MPG, Germany; GSRI, Greece; RGC and Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MEiN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZŠ, Slovenia; DSI/NRF, South Africa; MICINN, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TENMAK, Türkiye; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, Canarie, Compute Canada and CRC, Canada; PRIMUS 21/SCI/017 and UNCE SCI/013, Czech Republic; COST, ERC, ERDF, Horizon 2020 and Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d’Avenir Labex, Investissements d’Avenir Idex and ANR, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF, Greece; BSF-NSF and MINERVA, Israel; Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2014-2021, Norway; NCN and NAWA, Poland; La Caixa Banking Foundation, CERCA Programme Generalitat Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 8 The ATLAS Collaboration de Catalunya and PROMETEO and GenT Programmes Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; Göran Gustafssons Stiftelse, Sweden; The Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN, the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA), the Tier-2 facilities worldwide and large non-WLCG resource providers. Major contributors of computing resources are listed in Ref. [65]. References [1] C. Degrande, et al., Effective field theory: a modern approach to anomalous couplings, Ann. Phys. 335 (2013) 21, arXiv :1205 .4231 [hep -ph]. [2] A. Falkowski, M. Gonzalez-Alonso, A. Greljo, D. Marzocca, M. Son, Anomalous triple gauge couplings in the effective field theory approach at the LHC, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2017) 115, arXiv :1609 .06312 [hep -ph]. [3] O.J.P. Eboli, M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, S.M. Lietti, Bosonic quartic couplings at CERN LHC, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 095005, arXiv :hep -ph /0310141. [4] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the properties of Higgs boson production at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉 in the 𝐻→𝛾𝛾 channel using 139 𝑓𝑏−1 of 𝑝𝑝 collision data with the ATLAS experiment, arXiv :2207 .00348 [hep -ex], 2022. [5] ATLAS Collaboration, Evidence of 𝑊𝛾𝛾 production in 𝑝𝑝 collisions at √𝑠=8 𝑇𝑒𝑉 and limits on anomalous quartic gauge couplings with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 031802, arXiv :1503 .03243 [hep -ex]. [6] CMS Collaboration, Measurements of the 𝑝𝑝 →𝑊𝛾𝛾 and 𝑝𝑝 →𝑍𝛾𝛾 cross sections and limits on anomalous quartic gauge couplings at √𝑠=8 𝑇𝑒𝑉, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2017) 072, arXiv :1704 .00366 [hep -ex]. [7] CMS Collaboration, Measurements of the 𝑝𝑝 →𝑊±𝛾𝛾 and 𝑝𝑝 →𝑍𝛾𝛾 cross sections at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉 and limits on anomalous quartic gauge couplings, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2021) 174, arXiv :2105 .12780 [hep -ex]. [8] ATLAS Collaboration, The ATLAS experiment at the CERN large hadron collider, J. Instrum. 3 (2008) S08003. [9] ATLAS Collaboration, The ATLAS collaboration software and firmware, ATL-SOFTPUB-2021-001, https://cds .cern .ch /record /2767187, 2021. [10] ATLAS Collaboration, Luminosity determination in 𝑝𝑝 collisions at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉 using the ATLAS detector at the LHC, ATLAS-CONF-2019-021, https://cds .cern .ch / record /2677054, 2019. [11] ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS data quality operations and performance for 2015–2018 data-taking, J. Instrum. 15 (2020) P04003, arXiv :1911 .04632 [physics . ins -det]. [12] ATLAS Collaboration, Luminosity determination in 𝑝𝑝 collisions at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉 using the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 982, https://doi . org /10 .1140 /epjc /s10052 -023 -11747 -w, arXiv :2212 .09379 [hep -ex]. [13] G. Avoni, et al., The new LUCID-2 detector for luminosity measurement and monitoring in ATLAS, J. Instrum. 13 (2018) P07017. [14] E. Bothmann, et al., Event generation with Sherpa 2.2, SciPost Phys. 7 (2019) 034, arXiv :1905 .09127 [hep -ph]. [15] T. Gleisberg, S. Höche, Comix, a new matrix element generator, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2008) 039, arXiv :0808 .3674 [hep -ph]. [16] F. Cascioli, P. Maierhöfer, S. Pozzorini, Scattering amplitudes with open loops, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 111601, arXiv :1111 .5206 [hep -ph]. [17] F. Buccioni, et al., OpenLoops 2, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 866, arXiv :1907 .13071 [hep -ph]. [18] A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, L. Hofer, COLLIER: a fortran-based complex one-loop library in extended regularizations, Comput. Phys. Commun. 212 (2017) 220, arXiv :1604 . 06792 [hep -ph]. [19] S. Schumann, F. Krauss, A parton shower algorithm based on Catani–Seymour dipole factorisation, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2008) 038, arXiv :0709 .1027 [hep -ph]. [20] S. Catani, F. Krauss, B.R. Webber, R. Kuhn, QCD matrix elements + parton showers, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2001) 063, arXiv :hep -ph /0109231. [21] S. Höche, F. Krauss, S. Schumann, F. Siegert, QCD matrix elements and truncated showers, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2009) 053, arXiv :0903 .1219 [hep -ph]. [22] S. Höche, F. Krauss, M. Schönherr, F. Siegert, A critical appraisal of NLO+PS matching methods, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2012) 049, arXiv :1111 .1220 [hep -ph]. [23] S. Höche, F. Krauss, M. Schönherr, F. Siegert, QCD matrix elements + parton showers. The NLO case, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2013) 027, arXiv :1207 .5030 [hep -ph]. [24] The NNPDF Collaboration, R.D. Ball, et al., Parton distributions for the LHC run II, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2015) 040, arXiv :1410 .8849 [hep -ph]. [25] S. Kallweit, J.M. Lindert, P. Maierhöfer, S. Pozzorini, M. Schönherr, NLO electroweak automation and precise predictions for W+multijet production at the LHC, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2015) 012, arXiv :1412 .5157 [hep -ph]. [26] S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, E. Re, A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2010) 043, arXiv :1002 .2581 [hep -ph]. [27] T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna, P. Skands, A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1, Comput. Phys. Commun. 178 (2008) 852, arXiv :0710 .3820 [hep -ph]. [28] S. Mrenna, P. Skands, Automated parton-shower variations in PYTHIA 8, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 074005, arXiv :1605 .08352 [hep -ph]. [29] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the 𝑍∕𝛾∗boson transverse momentum distribution in 𝑝𝑝 collisions at √𝑠=7 𝑇𝑒𝑉 with the ATLAS detector, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2014) 145, arXiv :1406 .3660 [hep -ex]. [30] 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, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2014) 079, arXiv :1405 .0301 [hep -ph]. [31] NNPDF Collaboration, R.D. Ball, et al., Parton distributions with LHC data, Nucl. Phys. B 867 (2013) 244, arXiv :1207 .1303 [hep -ph]. [32] ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes to 7TeV data, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014021, https://cds .cern .ch /record /1966419, 2014. [33] ATLAS Collaboration, The ATLAS simulation infrastructure, Eur. Phys. J. C 70 (2010) 823, arXiv :1005 .4568 [physics .ins -det]. [34] S. Agostinelli, et al., GEANT4 – a simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 506 (2003) 250. [35] ATLAS Collaboration, The Pythia 8 A3 tune description of ATLAS minimum bias and inelastic measurements incorporating the Donnachie–Landshoff diffractive model, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-017, https://cds .cern .ch /record /2206965, 2016. [36] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of the ATLAS muon triggers in Run 2, J. Instrum. 15 (2020) P09015, arXiv :2004 .13447 [hep -ex]. [37] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of electron and photon triggers in ATLAS during LHC Run 2, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 47, arXiv :1909 .00761 [hep -ex]. [38] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the photon identification efficiencies with the ATLAS detector using LHC Run 2 data collected in 2015 and 2016, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 205, arXiv :1810 .05087 [hep -ex]. [39] ATLAS Collaboration, Topological cell clustering in the ATLAS calorimeters and its performance in LHC Run 1, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 490, arXiv :1603 .02934 [hep - ex]. [40] ATLAS Collaboration, Electron reconstruction and identification in the ATLAS experiment using the 2015 and 2016 LHC proton–proton collision data at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 639, arXiv :1902 .04655 [hep -ex]. [41] ATLAS Collaboration, Muon reconstruction performance of the ATLAS detector in proton–proton collision data at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 292, arXiv : 1603 .05598 [hep -ex]. [42] ATLAS Collaboration, Muon reconstruction and identification efficiency in ATLAS using the full Run 2 𝑝𝑝 collision data set at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 578, arXiv :2012 .00578 [hep -ex]. [43] M. Cacciari, G.P. Salam, G. Soyez, The anti-𝑘𝑡jet clustering algorithm, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2008) 063, arXiv :0802 .1189 [hep -ph]. [44] ATLAS Collaboration, Jet reconstruction and performance using particle flow with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 466, arXiv :1703 .10485 [hep -ex]. [45] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of pile-up mitigation techniques for jets in 𝑝𝑝 collisions at √𝑠=8 𝑇𝑒𝑉 using the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 581, arXiv :1510 .03823 [hep -ex]. [46] ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS 𝑏-jet identification performance and efficiency measurement with 𝑡 𝑡events in 𝑝𝑝 collisions at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 970, arXiv :1907 .05120 [hep -ex]. [47] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of 𝑏-jet identification in the ATLAS experiment, J. Instrum. 11 (2016) P04008, arXiv :1512 .01094 [hep -ex]. [48] ATLAS Collaboration, 𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠 𝑇performance in the ATLAS detector using 2015–2016 LHC 𝑝𝑝 collisions, ATLAS-CONF-2018-023, https://cds .cern .ch /record /2625233, 2018. [49] ATLAS Collaboration, Electron and photon performance measurements with the ATLAS detector using the 2015–2017 LHC proton–proton collision data, J. Instrum. 14 (2019) P12006, arXiv :1908 .00005 [hep -ex]. [50] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the isolated diphoton cross section in 𝑝𝑝 collisions at √𝑠=7 𝑇𝑒𝑉 with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 012003, arXiv :1107 .0581 [hep -ex]. [51] A.D. Bukin, Fitting function for asymmetric peaks, arXiv :0711 .4449 [physics .data - an], 2007. [52] K.S. Cranmer, Kernel estimation in high-energy physics, Comput. Phys. Commun. 136 (2001) 198, arXiv :hep -ex /0011057. [53] S. Das, A simple alternative to the Crystal Ball function, arXiv :1603 .08591 [hep -ex], 2016. [54] ATLAS Collaboration, Tools for estimating fake/non-prompt lepton backgrounds with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, J. Instrum. 18 (2023) T11004, https:// doi .org /10 .1088 /1748 -0221 /18 /11 /T11004, arXiv :2211 .16178 [hep -ex]. [55] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the 𝑍(→𝓁+𝓁−)𝛾production cross-section in 𝑝𝑝 collisions at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉 with the ATLAS detector, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2020) 054, arXiv :1911 .04813 [hep -ex]. [56] ATLAS Collaboration, Jet energy scale and resolution measured in proton–proton collisions at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉 with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2020) 689, arXiv :2007 .02645 [hep -ex]. [57] ATLAS Collaboration, Tagging and suppression of pileup jets, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014001, https://cds .cern .ch /record /1643929, 2014. [58] ATLAS Collaboration, Identification and rejection of pile-up jets at high pseudorapidity with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 580, arXiv :1705 .02211 [hep -ex], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 712. Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 9 The ATLAS Collaboration [59] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of missing transverse momentum reconstruction with the ATLAS detector using proton–proton collisions at √𝑠=13 𝑇𝑒𝑉, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 903, arXiv :1802 .08168 [hep -ex]. [60] J. Butterworth, et al., PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II, J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 023001, arXiv :1510 .03865 [hep -ph]. [61] A.D. Martin, W.J. Stirling, R.S. Thorne, G. Watt, Uncertainties on 𝛼𝑆in global PDF analyses and implications for predicted hadronic cross sections, Eur. Phys. J. C 64 (2009) 653, arXiv :0905 .3531 [hep -ph]. [62] ATLAS Collaboration, Multi-boson simulation for 13 TeV ATLAS analyses, ATLPHYS-PUB-2016-002, https://cds .cern .ch /record /2119986, 2016. [63] K. Cranmer, G. Lewis, L. Moneta, A. Shibata, W. Verkerke, HistFactory: a tool for creating statistical models for use with RooFit and RooStats, tech. rep., New York U., 2012, https://cds .cern .ch /record /1456844. [64] F. James, M. Roos, Minuit: a system for function minimization and analysis of the parameter errors and correlations, Comput. Phys. Commun. 10 (1975) 343. [65] ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS computing acknowledgements, ATL-SOFT-PUB2021–003, https://cds .cern .ch /record /2776662, 2021. The ATLAS Collaboration G. Aad103,, B. Abbott 121,, K. Abeling55,, N.J. Abicht 49,, S.H. Abidi29,, A. Aboulhorma 35e,, H. Abramowicz152,, H. Abreu 151,, Y. Abulaiti118,, A.C. Abusleme Hoffman 138a,, B.S. Acharya69a,69b, ,n, C. Adam Bourdarios4,, L. Adamczyk 86a,, L. Adamek156,, S.V. Addepalli26,, M.J. Addison102,, J. Adelman116,, A. Adiguzel 21c,, T. Adye135,, A.A. Affolder137,, Y. Afik36,, M.N. Agaras13,, J. Agarwala73a,73b,, A. Aggarwal 101,, C. Agheorghiesei 27c,, A. Ahmad36,, F. Ahmadov38, ,z, W.S. Ahmed105,, S. Ahuja 96,, X. Ai62a,, G. Aielli 76a,76b,, M. Ait Tamlihat35e,, B. Aitbenchikh 35a,, I. Aizenberg170,, M. Akbiyik 101,, T.P.A. Åkesson99,, A.V. Akimov 37,, D. Akiyama169,, N.N. Akolkar24,, K. Al Khoury 41,, G.L. Alberghi23b,, J. Albert 166,, P. Albicocco53,, G.L. Albouy60,, S. Alderweireldt52,, M. Aleksa36,, I.N. Aleksandrov 38,, C. Alexa27b,, T. Alexopoulos10,, A. Alfonsi115,, F. Alfonsi 23b,, M. Algren56,, M. Alhroob 121,, B. Ali133,, H.M.J. Ali 92,, S. Ali149,, S.W. Alibocus93,, M. Aliev 37,, G. Alimonti71a,, W. Alkakhi 55,, C. Allaire66,, B.M.M. Allbrooke 147,, J.F. Allen52,, C.A. Allendes Flores 138f,, P.P. Allport20,, A. Aloisio72a,72b,, F. Alonso91,, C. Alpigiani139,, M. Alvarez Estevez 100,, A. Alvarez Fernandez 101,, M.G. Alviggi72a,72b,, M. Aly 102,, Y. Amaral Coutinho83b,, A. Ambler 105,, C. Amelung36, M. Amerl102,, C.G. Ames 110,, D. Amidei107,, S.P. Amor Dos Santos131a,, K.R. Amos 164,, V. Ananiev126,, C. Anastopoulos 140,, T. Andeen11,, J.K. Anders36,, S.Y. Andrean 47a,47b,, A. Andreazza71a,71b,, S. Angelidakis9,, A. Angerami 41, ,ac, A.V. Anisenkov37,, A. Annovi 74a,, C. Antel56,, M.T. Anthony 140,, E. Antipov146,, M. Antonelli53,, D.J.A. Antrim17a,, F. Anulli 75a,, M. Aoki84,, T. Aoki 154,, J.A. Aparisi Pozo164,, M.A. Aparo 147,, L. Aperio Bella48,, C. Appelt 18,, A. Apyan26,, N. Aranzabal 36,, C. Arcangeletti53,, A.T.H. Arce 51,, E. Arena93,, J-F. Arguin 109,, S. Argyropoulos54,, J.-H. Arling 48,, A.J. Armbruster36,, O. Arnaez 4,, H. Arnold115,, Z.P. Arrubarrena Tame 110, G. Artoni 75a,75b,, H. Asada112,, K. Asai 119,, S. Asai154,, N.A. Asbah61,, J. Assahsah 35d,, K. Assamagan29,, R. Astalos 28a,, S. Atashi161,, R.J. Atkin 33a,, M. Atkinson163, N.B. Atlay18,, H. Atmani62b, P.A. Atmasiddha107,, K. Augsten 133,, S. Auricchio72a,72b,, A.D. Auriol20,, V.A. Austrup 102,, G. Avolio36,, K. Axiotis 56,, G. Azuelos109, ,ag, D. Babal28b,, H. Bachacou136,, K. Bachas 153,,q, A. Bachiu34,, F. Backman 47a,47b,, A. Badea61,, P. Bagnaia 75a,75b,, M. Bahmani18,, A.J. Bailey 164,, V.R. Bailey163,, J.T. Baines135,, L. Baines95,, C. Bakalis10,, O.K. Baker173,, E. Bakos15,, D. Bakshi Gupta8,, R. Balasubramanian115,, E.M. Baldin37,, P. Balek86a,, E. Ballabene23b,23a,, F. Balli 136,, L.M. Baltes63a,, W.K. Balunas 32,, J. Balz101,, E. Banas 87,, M. Bandieramonte130,, A. Bandyopadhyay24,, S. Bansal24,, L. Barak152,, M. Barakat 48,, E.L. Barberio106,, D. Barberis 57b,57a,, M. Barbero103,, G. Barbour97, K.N. Barends 33a,, T. Barillari111,, M-S. Barisits36,, T. Barklow 144,, P. Baron123,, D.A. Baron Moreno102,, A. Baroncelli62a,, G. Barone29,, A.J. Barr127,, J.D. Barr 97,, L. Barranco Navarro 47a,47b,, F. Barreiro100,, J. Barreiro Guimarães da Costa14a,, U. Barron152,, M.G. Barros Teixeira 131a,, S. Barsov37,, F. Bartels63a,, R. Bartoldus144,, A.E. Barton92,, P. Bartos 28a,, A. Basan101,, M. Baselga 49,, A. Bassalat66, ,b, M.J. Basso 157a,, C.R. Basson102,, R.L. Bates 59,, S. Batlamous35e, J.R. Batley 32,, B. Batool142,, M. Battaglia 137,, D. Battulga18,, M. Bauce 75a,75b,, M. Bauer36,, P. Bauer24,, Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 16 The ATLAS Collaboration H.Y. Meng156,, L. Meng 92,, S. Menke 111,, M. Mentink36,, E. Meoni 43b,43a,, C. Merlassino127,, L. Merola72a,72b,, C. Meroni 71a,71b,, G. Merz107, O. Meshkov37,, J. Metcalfe 6,, A.S. Mete6,, C. Meyer68,, J-P. Meyer136,, R.P. Middleton 135,, L. Mijovi´ c52,, G. Mikenberg170,, M. Mikestikova132,, M. Mikuž94,, H. Mildner101,, A. Milic36,, C.D. Milke44,, D.W. Miller39,, L.S. Miller34,, A. Milov170,, D.A. Milstead47a,47b, T. Min14c, A.A. Minaenko 37,, I.A. Minashvili150b,, L. Mince 59,, A.I. Mincer118,, B. Mindur86a,, M. Mineev38,, Y. Mino88,, L.M. Mir13,, M. Miralles Lopez 164,, M. Mironova17a,, A. Mishima154, M.C. Missio114,, T. Mitani 169,, A. Mitra168,, V.A. Mitsou 164,, O. Miu156,, P.S. Miyagawa95,, Y. Miyazaki 90, A. Mizukami 84,, T. Mkrtchyan63a,, M. Mlinarevic 97,, T. Mlinarevic97,, M. Mlynarikova 36,, S. Mobius19,, K. Mochizuki 109,, P. Moder48,, P. Mogg110,, A.F. Mohammed14a,14e,, S. Mohapatra 41,, G. Mokgatitswane33g,, L. Moleri 170,, B. Mondal142,, S. Mondal133,, K. Mönig 48,, E. Monnier103,, L. Monsonis Romero 164, J. Montejo Berlingen 13,84,, M. Montella120,, F. Montereali 77a,77b,, F. Monticelli91,, S. Monzani 69a,69c,, N. Morange66,, A.L. Moreira De Carvalho131a,, M. Moreno Llácer 164,, C. Moreno Martinez 56,, P. Morettini57b,, S. Morgenstern36,, M. Morii61,, M. Morinaga 154,, A.K. Morley36,, F. Morodei 75a,75b,, L. Morvaj36,, P. Moschovakos36,, B. Moser 36,, M. Mosidze150b, T. Moskalets54,, P. Moskvitina 114,, J. Moss31, ,m, E.J.W. Moyse104,, O. Mtintsilana 33g,, S. Muanza103,, J. Mueller 130,, D. Muenstermann 92,, R. Müller19,, G.A. Mullier 162,, A.J. Mullin32, J.J. Mullin129, D.P. Mungo 156,, D. Munoz Perez 164,, F.J. Munoz Sanchez102,, M. Murin 102,, W.J. Murray168,135,, A. Murrone71a,71b,, J.M. Muse 121,, M. Muškinja17a,, C. Mwewa 29,, A.G. Myagkov37,,a, A.J. Myers8,, A.A. Myers 130, G. Myers 68,, M. Myska133,, B.P. Nachman17a,, O. Nackenhorst49,, A. Nag50,, K. Nagai127,, K. Nagano84,, J.L. Nagle29, ,ai, E. Nagy103,, A.M. Nairz 36,, Y. Nakahama84,, K. Nakamura 84,, K. Nakkalil5,, H. Nanjo125,, R. Narayan 44,, E.A. Narayanan113,, I. Naryshkin 37,, M. Naseri34,, S. Nasri160,, C. Nass24,, G. Navarro 22a,, J. Navarro-Gonzalez164,, R. Nayak152,, A. Nayaz18,, P.Y. Nechaeva37,, F. Nechansky48,, L. Nedic 127,, T.J. Neep20,, A. Negri73a,73b,, M. Negrini 23b,, C. Nellist115,, C. Nelson105,, K. Nelson 107,, S. Nemecek132,, M. Nessi 36, ,h, M.S. Neubauer 163,, F. Neuhaus101,, J. Neundorf48,, R. Newhouse165,, P.R. Newman 20,, C.W. Ng130,, Y.W.Y. Ng 48,, B. Ngair35e,, H.D.N. Nguyen109,, R.B. Nickerson127,, R. Nicolaidou136,, J. Nielsen 137,, M. Niemeyer 55,, J. Niermann55,36,, N. Nikiforou 36,, V. Nikolaenko37,,a, I. Nikolic-Audit128,, K. Nikolopoulos20,, P. Nilsson29,, I. Ninca 48,, H.R. Nindhito56,, G. Ninio 152,, A. Nisati75a,, N. Nishu 2,, R. Nisius111,, J-E. Nitschke50,, E.K. Nkadimeng 33g,, S.J. Noacco Rosende91,, T. Nobe 154,, D.L. Noel32,, T. Nommensen148,, M.B. Norfolk140,, R.R.B. Norisam97,, B.J. Norman34,, J. Novak94,, T. Novak48,, L. Novotny133,, R. Novotny 113,, L. Nozka123,, K. Ntekas 161,, N.M.J. Nunes De Moura Junior83b,, E. Nurse97, J. Ocariz128,, A. Ochi 85,, I. Ochoa131a,, S. Oerdek 162,, J.T. Offermann39,, A. Ogrodnik134,, A. Oh 102,, C.C. Ohm145,, H. Oide84,, R. Oishi 154,, M.L. Ojeda48,, Y. Okazaki 88,, M.W. O’Keefe93, Y. Okumura154,, L.F. Oleiro Seabra 131a,, S.A. Olivares Pino138d,, D. Oliveira Damazio29,, D. Oliveira Goncalves 83a,, J.L. Oliver161,, A. Olszewski 87,, Ö.O. Öncel54,, D.C. O’Neil143,, A.P. O’Neill 19,, A. Onofre131a,131e,, P.U.E. Onyisi11,, M.J. Oreglia39,, G.E. Orellana91,, D. Orestano 77a,77b,, N. Orlando13,, R.S. Orr 156,, V. O’Shea59,, L.M. Osojnak129,, R. Ospanov62a,, G. Otero y Garzon 30,, H. Otono90,, P.S. Ott 63a,, G.J. Ottino17a,, M. Ouchrif 35d,, J. Ouellette29,, F. Ould-Saada 126,, M. Owen 59,, R.E. Owen135,, K.Y. Oyulmaz 21a,, V.E. Ozcan21a,, N. Ozturk8,, S. Ozturk 82,, H.A. Pacey 32,, A. Pacheco Pages13,, C. Padilla Aranda 13,, G. Padovano75a,75b,, S. Pagan Griso 17a,, G. Palacino68,, A. Palazzo 70a,70b,, S. Palestini36,, J. Pan 173,, Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 17 The ATLAS Collaboration T. Pan64a,, D.K. Panchal 11,, C.E. Pandini115,, J.G. Panduro Vazquez 96,, H. Pang14b,, P. Pani 48,, G. Panizzo69a,69c,, L. Paolozzi56,, C. Papadatos109,, S. Parajuli 44,, A. Paramonov6,, C. Paraskevopoulos10,, D. Paredes Hernandez 64b,, T.H. Park 156,, M.A. Parker32,, F. Parodi 57b,57a,, E.W. Parrish116,, V.A. Parrish 52,, J.A. Parsons41,, U. Parzefall 54,, B. Pascual Dias109,, L. Pascual Dominguez152,, F. Pasquali 115,, E. Pasqualucci75a,, S. Passaggio57b,, F. Pastore96,, P. Pasuwan47a,47b,, P. Patel 87,, U.M. Patel51,, J.R. Pater 102,, T. Pauly36,, J. Pearkes 144,, M. Pedersen126,, R. Pedro131a,, S.V. Peleganchuk 37,, O. Penc36,, E.A. Pender 52,, H. Peng62a,, K.E. Penski110,, M. Penzin 37,, B.S. Peralva83d,, A.P. Pereira Peixoto60,, L. Pereira Sanchez 47a,47b,, D.V. Perepelitsa29, ,ai, E. Perez Codina157a,, M. Perganti 10,, L. Perini71a,71b, ,∗, H. Pernegger36,, A. Perrevoort114,, O. Perrin 40,, K. Peters 48,, R.F.Y. Peters102,, B.A. Petersen 36,, T.C. Petersen42,, E. Petit103,, V. Petousis 133,, C. Petridou153, ,e, A. Petrukhin 142,, M. Pettee17a,, N.E. Pettersson36,, A. Petukhov37,, K. Petukhova 134,, A. Peyaud136,, R. Pezoa 138f,, L. Pezzotti 36,, G. Pezzullo173,, T.M. Pham171,, T. Pham 106,, P.W. Phillips135,, G. Piacquadio 146,, E. Pianori17a,, F. Piazza 71a,71b,, R. Piegaia30,, D. Pietreanu 27b,, A.D. Pilkington102,, M. Pinamonti 69a,69c,, J.L. Pinfold2,, B.C. Pinheiro Pereira131a,, A.E. Pinto Pinoargote136,, K.M. Piper 147,, A. Pirttikoski56,, C. Pitman Donaldson97, D.A. Pizzi34,, L. Pizzimento 76a,76b,, A. Pizzini115,, M.-A. Pleier 29,, V. Plesanovs54, V. Pleskot134,, E. Plotnikova38, G. Poddar4,, R. Poettgen 99,, L. Poggioli128,, I. Pokharel55,, S. Polacek 134,, G. Polesello73a,, A. Poley 143,157a,, R. Polifka133,, A. Polini 23b,, C.S. Pollard168,, Z.B. Pollock 120,, V. Polychronakos29,, E. Pompa Pacchi 75a,75b,, D. Ponomarenko114,, L. Pontecorvo36,, S. Popa 27a,, G.A. Popeneciu27d,, A. Poreba36,, D.M. Portillo Quintero157a,, S. Pospisil133,, M.A. Postill 140,, P. Postolache27c,, K. Potamianos168,, P.A. Potepa 86a,, I.N. Potrap38,, C.J. Potter32,, H. Potti 1,, T. Poulsen48,, J. Poveda 164,, M.E. Pozo Astigarraga36,, A. Prades Ibanez164,, J. Pretel54,, D. Price102,, M. Primavera70a,, M.A. Principe Martin 100,, R. Privara123,, T. Procter 59,, M.L. Proffitt139,, N. Proklova129,, K. Prokofiev64c,, G. Proto111,, S. Protopopescu29,, J. Proudfoot 6,, M. Przybycien86a,, W.W. Przygoda 86b,, J.E. Puddefoot140,, D. Pudzha37,, D. Pyatiizbyantseva 37,, J. Qian107,, D. Qichen 102,, Y. Qin102,, T. Qiu 52,, A. Quadt55,, M. Queitsch-Maitland102,, G. Quetant 56,, G. Rabanal Bolanos61,, D. Rafanoharana 54,, F. Ragusa71a,71b,, J.L. Rainbolt39,, J.A. Raine 56,, S. Rajagopalan29,, E. Ramakoti 37,, K. Ran48,14e,, N.P. Rapheeha 33g,, H. Rasheed27b,, V. Raskina 128,, D.F. Rassloff63a,, S. Rave 101,, B. Ravina55,, I. Ravinovich 170,, M. Raymond36,, A.L. Read 126,, N.P. Readioff140,, D.M. Rebuzzi 73a,73b,, G. Redlinger 29,, A.S. Reed111,, K. Reeves 26,, J.A. Reidelsturz172,, D. Reikher152,, A. Rej 142,, C. Rembser36,, A. Renardi48,, M. Renda 27b,, M.B. Rendel 111, F. Renner 48,, A.G. Rennie59,, S. Resconi 71a,, M. Ressegotti57b,57a,, S. Rettie36,, J.G. Reyes Rivera 108,, B. Reynolds120, E. Reynolds17a,, O.L. Rezanova37,, P. Reznicek 134,, N. Ribaric92,, E. Ricci 78a,78b,, R. Richter111,, S. Richter47a,47b,, E. Richter-Was86b,, M. Ridel 128,, S. Ridouani35d,, P. Rieck118,, P. Riedler36,, M. Rijssenbeek146,, A. Rimoldi73a,73b,, M. Rimoldi 48,, L. Rinaldi23b,23a,, T.T. Rinn 29,, M.P. Rinnagel110,, G. Ripellino 162,, I. Riu13,, P. Rivadeneira 48,, J.C. Rivera Vergara166,, F. Rizatdinova122,, E. Rizvi95,, B.A. Roberts168,, B.R. Roberts17a,, S.H. Robertson 105, ,x, M. Robin48,, D. Robinson 32,, C.M. Robles Gajardo138f , M. Robles Manzano101,, A. Robson59,, A. Rocchi76a,76b,, C. Roda 74a,74b,, S. Rodriguez Bosca63a,, Y. Rodriguez Garcia22a,, A. Rodriguez Rodriguez 54,, A.M. Rodríguez Vera 157b,, S. Roe36, J.T. Roemer161,, A.R. Roepe-Gier 137,, J. Roggel 172,, O. Røhne126,, R.A. Rojas 104,, C.P.A. Roland68,, J. Roloff29,, A. Romaniouk 37,, E. Romano73a,73b,, M. Romano23b,, A.C. Romero Hernandez163,, Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 18 The ATLAS Collaboration N. Rompotis93,, L. Roos 128,, S. Rosati75a,, B.J. Rosser 39,, E. Rossi127,, E. Rossi72a,72b,, L.P. Rossi57b,, L. Rossini48,, R. Rosten 120,, M. Rotaru27b,, B. Rottler 54,, C. Rougier103, ,ab, D. Rousseau66,, D. Rousso32,, A. Roy 163,, S. Roy-Garand156,, A. Rozanov 103,, Y. Rozen151,, X. Ruan 33g,, A. Rubio Jimenez164,, A.J. Ruby 93,, V.H. Ruelas Rivera18,, T.A. Ruggeri 1,, A. Ruggiero 127,, A. Ruiz-Martinez164,, A. Rummler 36,, Z. Rurikova54,, N.A. Rusakovich38,, H.L. Russell166,, G. Russo75a,75b,, J.P. Rutherfoord 7,, S. Rutherford Colmenares32,, K. Rybacki92, M. Rybar 134,, E.B. Rye126,, A. Ryzhov 44,, J.A. Sabater Iglesias56,, P. Sabatini164,, L. Sabetta75a,75b,, H.F-W. Sadrozinski137,, F. Safai Tehrani 75a,, B. Safarzadeh Samani 147,, M. Safdari144,, S. Saha 166,, M. Sahinsoy111,, M. Saimpert 136,, M. Saito154,, T. Saito 154,, D. Salamani36,, A. Salnikov 144,, J. Salt164,, A. Salvador Salas 13,, D. Salvatore43b,43a,, F. Salvatore 147,, A. Salzburger36,, D. Sammel 54,, D. Sampsonidis153, ,e, D. Sampsonidou 124,, J. Sánchez164,, A. Sanchez Pineda 4,, V. Sanchez Sebastian164,, H. Sandaker 126,, C.O. Sander48,, J.A. Sandesara104,, M. Sandhoff172,, C. Sandoval22b,, D.P.C. Sankey 135,, T. Sano88,, A. Sansoni53,, L. Santi75a,75b,, C. Santoni 40,, H. Santos131a,131b,, S.N. Santpur 17a,, A. Santra170,, K.A. Saoucha 140,, J.G. Saraiva131a,131d,, J. Sardain7,, O. Sasaki 84,, K. Sato158,, C. Sauer 63b, F. Sauerburger 54,, E. Sauvan 4,, P. Savard156,,ag, R. Sawada154,, C. Sawyer 135,, L. Sawyer 98,, I. Sayago Galvan164, C. Sbarra 23b,, A. Sbrizzi 23b,23a,, T. Scanlon97,, J. Schaarschmidt 139,, P. Schacht111,, D. Schaefer 39,, U. Schäfer101,, A.C. Schaffer 66,44,, D. Schaile110,, R.D. Schamberger 146,, C. Scharf18,, M.M. Schefer19,, V.A. Schegelsky 37,, D. Scheirich134,, F. Schenck 18,, M. Schernau161,, C. Scheulen55,, C. Schiavi57b,57a,, E.J. Schioppa70a,70b,, M. Schioppa 43b,43a,, B. Schlag144, ,o, K.E. Schleicher 54,, S. Schlenker36,, J. Schmeing172,, M.A. Schmidt 172,, K. Schmieden101,, C. Schmitt 101,, S. Schmitt48,, L. Schoeffel 136,, A. Schoening63b,, P.G. Scholer 54,, E. Schopf127,, M. Schott 101,, J. Schovancova36,, S. Schramm 56,, F. Schroeder172,, T. Schroer56,, H-C. Schultz-Coulon63a,, M. Schumacher54,, B.A. Schumm137,, Ph. Schune136,, A.J. Schuy 139,, H.R. Schwartz137,, A. Schwartzman 144,, T.A. Schwarz107,, Ph. Schwemling136,, R. Schwienhorst 108,, A. Sciandra137,, G. Sciolla 26,, F. Scuri74a,, C.D. Sebastiani93,, K. Sedlaczek 116,, P. Seema18,, S.C. Seidel113,, A. Seiden 137,, B.D. Seidlitz41,, C. Seitz48,, J.M. Seixas 83b,, G. Sekhniaidze72a,, S.J. Sekula44,, L. Selem 60,, N. Semprini-Cesari23b,23a,, D. Sengupta56,, V. Senthilkumar 164,, L. Serin66,, L. Serkin 69a,69b,, M. Sessa76a,76b,, H. Severini121,, F. Sforza57b,57a,, A. Sfyrla56,, E. Shabalina55,, R. Shaheen 145,, J.D. Shahinian129,, D. Shaked Renous170,, L.Y. Shan 14a,, M. Shapiro17a,, A. Sharma 36,, A.S. Sharma165,, P. Sharma 80,, S. Sharma48,, P.B. Shatalov 37,, K. Shaw147,, S.M. Shaw 102,, A. Shcherbakova37,, Q. Shen 62c,5,, P. Sherwood97,, L. Shi 97,, X. Shi14a,, C.O. Shimmin 173,, Y. Shimogama169,, J.D. Shinner 96,, I.P.J. Shipsey127,, S. Shirabe 56, ,h, M. Shiyakova38, ,v, J. Shlomi 170,, M.J. Shochet39,, J. Shojaii 106,, D.R. Shope126,, B. Shrestha 121,, S. Shrestha120, ,aj, E.M. Shrif33g,, M.J. Shroff166,, P. Sicho132,, A.M. Sickles163,, E. Sideras Haddad33g,, A. Sidoti 23b,, F. Siegert50,, Dj. Sijacki 15,, R. Sikora86a,, F. Sili91,, J.M. Silva 20,, M.V. Silva Oliveira29,, S.B. Silverstein 47a,, S. Simion66, R. Simoniello36,, E.L. Simpson59,, H. Simpson 147,, L.R. Simpson107,, N.D. Simpson99, S. Simsek82,, S. Sindhu 55,, P. Sinervo156,, S. Singh 156,, S. Sinha48,, S. Sinha 102,, M. Sioli23b,23a,, I. Siral 36,, E. Sitnikova48,, S.Yu. Sivoklokov37, ,∗, J. Sjölin47a,47b,, A. Skaf55,, E. Skorda 99,, P. Skubic121,, M. Slawinska 87,, V. Smakhtin170, B.H. Smart135,, J. Smiesko 36,, S.Yu. Smirnov37,, Y. Smirnov37,, L.N. Smirnova37, ,a, O. Smirnova99,, A.C. Smith 41,, E.A. Smith39,, H.A. Smith 127,, J.L. Smith93,, R. Smith 144, M. Smizanska92,, K. Smolek 133,, A.A. Snesarev37,, S.R. Snider156,, H.L. Snoek 115,, S. Snyder29,, Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 19 The ATLAS Collaboration R. Sobie166, ,x, A. Soffer 152,, C.A. Solans Sanchez36,, E.Yu. Soldatov 37,, U. Soldevila164,, A.A. Solodkov37,, S. Solomon 26,, A. Soloshenko38,, K. Solovieva54,, O.V. Solovyanov40,, V. Solovyev37,, P. Sommer 36,, A. Sonay13,, W.Y. Song 157b,, J.M. Sonneveld115,, A. Sopczak 133,, A.L. Sopio97,, F. Sopkova 28b,, V. Sothilingam63a, S. Sottocornola 68,, R. Soualah117b,, Z. Soumaimi 35e,, D. South48,, S. Spagnolo 70a,70b,, M. Spalla111,, D. Sperlich 54,, G. Spigo36,, M. Spina 147,, S. Spinali92,, D.P. Spiteri 59,, M. Spousta134,, E.J. Staats 34,, A. Stabile71a,71b,, R. Stamen 63a,, M. Stamenkovic115,, A. Stampekis 20,, M. Standke24,, E. Stanecka87,, M.V. Stange50,, B. Stanislaus17a,, M.M. Stanitzki 48,, B. Stapf48,, E.A. Starchenko 37,, G.H. Stark137,, J. Stark103, ,ab, D.M. Starko157b, P. Staroba132,, S. Stärz 105,, R. Staszewski87,, G. Stavropoulos 46,, J. Steentoft162,, P. Steinberg29,, B. Stelzer 143,157a,, H.J. Stelzer 130,, O. Stelzer-Chilton157a,, H. Stenzel 58,, T.J. Stevenson147,, G.A. Stewart 36,, J.R. Stewart 122,, M.C. Stockton36,, G. Stoicea27b,, M. Stolarski131a,, S. Stonjek 111,, A. Straessner50,, J. Strandberg145,, S. Strandberg 47a,47b,, M. Strauss121,, T. Strebler 103,, P. Strizenec28b,, R. Ströhmer167,, D.M. Strom 124,, L.R. Strom48,, R. Stroynowski44,, A. Strubig47a,47b,, S.A. Stucci29,, B. Stugu 16,, J. Stupak121,, N.A. Styles48,, D. Su144,, S. Su 62a,, W. Su62d,, X. Su 62a,66,, K. Sugizaki154,, V.V. Sulin 37,, M.J. Sullivan93,, D.M.S. Sultan78a,78b,, L. Sultanaliyeva 37,, S. Sultansoy3b,, T. Sumida 88,, S. Sun107,, S. Sun 171,, O. Sunneborn Gudnadottir162,, N. Sur103,, M.R. Sutton147,, H. Suzuki158,, M. Svatos 132,, M. Swiatlowski157a,, T. Swirski 167,, I. Sykora28a,, M. Sykora134,, T. Sykora 134,, D. Ta101,, K. Tackmann48,,u, A. Taffard 161,, R. Tafirout157a,, J.S. Tafoya Vargas66,, R. Takashima 89,, E.P. Takeva52,, Y. Takubo 84,, M. Talby103,, A.A. Talyshev 37,, K.C. Tam 64b,, N.M. Tamir152, A. Tanaka154,, J. Tanaka 154,, R. Tanaka66,, M. Tanasini57b,57a,, Z. Tao165,, S. Tapia Araya138f,, S. Tapprogge101,, A. Tarek Abouelfadl Mohamed108,, S. Tarem 151,, K. Tariq14a,, G. Tarna 103,27b,, G.F. Tartarelli71a,, P. Tas 134,, M. Tasevsky132,, E. Tassi 43b,43a,, A.C. Tate163,, G. Tateno154,, Y. Tayalati35e,,w, G.N. Taylor 106,, W. Taylor157b,, H. Teagle 93, A.S. Tee 171,, R. Teixeira De Lima144,, P. Teixeira-Dias96,, J.J. Teoh 156,, K. Terashi154,, J. Terron100,, S. Terzo 13,, M. Testa53,, R.J. Teuscher156,,x, A. Thaler79,, O. Theiner 56,, N. Themistokleous52,, T. Theveneaux-Pelzer 103,, O. Thielmann172,, D.W. Thomas 96, J.P. Thomas 20,, E.A. Thompson17a,, P.D. Thompson20,, E. Thomson129,, Y. Tian 55,, V. Tikhomirov37, ,a, Yu.A. Tikhonov 37,, S. Timoshenko37, D. Timoshyn134,, E.X.L. Ting1,, P. Tipton 173,, S.H. Tlou33g,, A. Tnourji 40,, K. Todome23b,23a,, S. Todorova-Nova 134,, S. Todt50, M. Togawa84,, J. Tojo 90,, S. Tokár28a,, K. Tokushuku 84,, O. Toldaiev68,, R. Tombs32,, M. Tomoto84,112,, L. Tompkins 144, ,o, K.W. Topolnicki86b,, E. Torrence 124,, H. Torres103, ,ab, E. Torró Pastor164,, M. Toscani 30,, C. Tosciri39,, M. Tost11,, D.R. Tovey140,, A. Traeet16, I.S. Trandafir27b,, T. Trefzger 167,, A. Tricoli29,, I.M. Trigger 157a,, S. Trincaz-Duvoid128,, D.A. Trischuk26,, B. Trocmé 60,, C. Troncon71a,, L. Truong33c,, M. Trzebinski 87,, A. Trzupek87,, F. Tsai146,, M. Tsai 107,, A. Tsiamis153, ,e, P.V. Tsiareshka37, S. Tsigaridas 157a,, A. Tsirigotis153, ,s, V. Tsiskaridze156,, E.G. Tskhadadze150a,, M. Tsopoulou153,,e, Y. Tsujikawa88,, I.I. Tsukerman37,, V. Tsulaia17a,, S. Tsuno 84,, O. Tsur151, K. Tsuri119,, D. Tsybychev 146,, Y. Tu64b,, A. Tudorache 27b,, V. Tudorache27b,, A.N. Tuna 36,, S. Turchikhin38,, I. Turk Cakir3a,, R. Turra 71a,, T. Turtuvshin38, ,y, P.M. Tuts41,, S. Tzamarias 153, ,e, P. Tzanis10,, E. Tzovara101,, K. Uchida154, F. Ukegawa158,, P.A. Ulloa Poblete138c,138b,, E.N. Umaka 29,, G. Unal36,, M. Unal 11,, A. Undrus29,, G. Unel 161,, J. Urban28b,, P. Urquijo 106,, G. Usai8,, R. Ushioda 155,, M. Usman109,, Z. Uysal21b,, L. Vacavant103,, V. Vacek133,, B. Vachon 105,, K.O.H. Vadla126,, T. Vafeiadis 36,, A. Vaitkus97,, C. Valderanis 110,, Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 20 The ATLAS Collaboration E. Valdes Santurio47a,47b,, M. Valente 157a,, S. Valentinetti23b,23a,, A. Valero 164,, E. Valiente Moreno164,, A. Vallier103, ,ab, J.A. Valls Ferrer164,, D.R. Van Arneman 115,, T.R. Van Daalen139,, A. Van Der Graaf49,, P. Van Gemmeren6,, M. Van Rijnbach126,36,, S. Van Stroud97,, I. Van Vulpen115,, M. Vanadia 76a,76b,, W. Vandelli36,, M. Vandenbroucke 136,, E.R. Vandewall122,, D. Vannicola152,, L. Vannoli57b,57a,, R. Vari75a,, E.W. Varnes 7,, C. Varni17a,, T. Varol149,, D. Varouchas66,, L. Varriale 164,, K.E. Varvell148,, M.E. Vasile 27b,, L. Vaslin40, G.A. Vasquez 166,, F. Vazeille40,, T. Vazquez Schroeder36,, J. Veatch31,, V. Vecchio102,, M.J. Veen 104,, I. Veliscek127,, L.M. Veloce156,, F. Veloso131a,131c,, S. Veneziano 75a,, A. Ventura70a,70b,, A. Verbytskyi 111,, M. Verducci74a,74b,, C. Vergis24,, M. Verissimo De Araujo 83b,, W. Verkerke 115,, J.C. Vermeulen115,, C. Vernieri 144,, P.J. Verschuuren96,, M. Vessella104,, M.C. Vetterli 143, ,ag, A. Vgenopoulos153, ,e, N. Viaux Maira 138f,, T. Vickey140,, O.E. Vickey Boeriu 140,, G.H.A. Viehhauser127,, L. Vigani63b,, M. Villa23b,23a,, M. Villaplana Perez 164,, E.M. Villhauer52, E. Vilucchi53,, M.G. Vincter34,, G.S. Virdee20,, A. Vishwakarma52,, A. Visibile 115, C. Vittori36,, I. Vivarelli147,, V. Vladimirov168, E. Voevodina111,, F. Vogel110,, P. Vokac 133,, J. Von Ahnen48,, E. Von Toerne 24,, B. Vormwald36,, V. Vorobel134,, K. Vorobev37,, M. Vos 164,, K. Voss142,, J.H. Vossebeld 93,, M. Vozak115,, L. Vozdecky 95,, N. Vranjes15,, M. Vranjes Milosavljevic 15,, M. Vreeswijk115,, R. Vuillermet36,, O. Vujinovic101,, I. Vukotic39,, S. Wada 158,, C. Wagner104, J.M. Wagner17a,, W. Wagner 172,, S. Wahdan172,, H. Wahlberg91,, R. Wakasa 158,, M. Wakida112,, J. Walder135,, R. Walker 110,, W. Walkowiak142,, A. Wall129,, T. Wamorkar 6,, A.Z. Wang171,, C. Wang 101,, C. Wang62c,, H. Wang17a,, J. Wang64a,, R.-J. Wang101,, R. Wang 61,, R. Wang6,, S.M. Wang 149,, S. Wang62b,, T. Wang62a,, W.T. Wang 80,, W. Wang14a,, X. Wang 14c,, X. Wang163,, X. Wang 62c,, Y. Wang62d,, Y. Wang 14c,, Z. Wang107,, Z. Wang62d,51,62c,, Z. Wang 107,, A. Warburton105,, R.J. Ward 20,, N. Warrack59,, A.T. Watson 20,, H. Watson59,, M.F. Watson 20,, E. Watton59,135,, G. Watts 139,, B.M. Waugh97,, C. Weber 29,, H.A. Weber18,, M.S. Weber19,, S.M. Weber 63a,, C. Wei62a,, Y. Wei127,, A.R. Weidberg 127,, E.J. Weik118,, J. Weingarten 49,, M. Weirich 101,, C. Weiser54,, C.J. Wells 48,, T. Wenaus29,, B. Wendland49,, T. Wengler36,, N.S. Wenke 111, N. Wermes 24,, M. Wessels63a,, K. Whalen 124,, A.M. Wharton92,, A.S. White 61,, A. White8,, M.J. White 1,, D. Whiteson161,, L. Wickremasinghe 125,, W. Wiedenmann171,, C. Wiel50,, M. Wielers 135,, C. Wiglesworth42,, D.J. Wilbern 121, H.G. Wilkens36,, D.M. Williams41,, H.H. Williams 129, S. Williams32,, S. Willocq 104,, B.J. Wilson102,, P.J. Windischhofer39,, F.I. Winkel 30,, F. Winklmeier 124,, B.T. Winter54,, J.K. Winter 102,, M. Wittgen144, M. Wobisch98,, Z. Wolffs 115,, R. Wölker127,, J. Wollrath 161, M.W. Wolter 87,, H. Wolters131a,131c,, A.F. Wongel 48,, S.D. Worm48,, B.K. Wosiek 87,, K.W. Wo´zniak87,, S. Wozniewski55,, K. Wraight59,, C. Wu 20,, J. Wu14a,14e,, M. Wu64a,, M. Wu114,, S.L. Wu171,, X. Wu56,, Y. Wu 62a,, Z. Wu136,, J. Wuerzinger 111,, T.R. Wyatt 102,, B.M. Wynne52,, S. Xella 42,, L. Xia14c,, M. Xia 14b,, J. Xiang64c,, X. Xiao 107,, M. Xie62a,, X. Xie62a,, S. Xin14a,14e,, J. Xiong17a,, D. Xu14a,, H. Xu 62a,, L. Xu62a,, R. Xu 129,, T. Xu107,, Y. Xu 14b,, Z. Xu52,, Z. Xu14a,, B. Yabsley148,, S. Yacoob 33a,, N. Yamaguchi90,, Y. Yamaguchi 155,, E. Yamashita154,, H. Yamauchi158,, T. Yamazaki 17a,, Y. Yamazaki85,, J. Yan 62c, S. Yan127,, Z. Yan25,, H.J. Yang62c,62d,, H.T. Yang62a,, S. Yang 62a,, T. Yang64c,, X. Yang 62a,, X. Yang14a,, Y. Yang44,, Y. Yang62a, Z. Yang62a,, W-M. Yao 17a,, Y.C. Yap48,, H. Ye 14c,, H. Ye55,, J. Ye 44,, S. Ye29,, X. Ye 62a,, Y. Yeh97,, I. Yeletskikh 38,, B.K. Yeo17a,, M.R. Yexley 97,, P. Yin41,, K. Yorita 169,, S. Younas27b,, C.J.S. Young54,, C. Young 144,, Y. Yu62a,, M. Yuan 107,, R. Yuan62b,,k, L. Yue 97,, M. Zaazoua62a,, Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 21 The ATLAS Collaboration B. Zabinski87,, E. Zaid52, T. Zakareishvili 150b,, N. Zakharchuk34,, S. Zambito 56,, J.A. Zamora Saa138d,138b,, J. Zang 154,, D. Zanzi54,, O. Zaplatilek133,, C. Zeitnitz 172,, H. Zeng14a,, J.C. Zeng163,, D.T. Zenger Jr26,, O. Zenin 37,, T. Ženiš28a,, S. Zenz95,, S. Zerradi 35a,, D. Zerwas66,, M. Zhai14a,14e,, B. Zhang 14c,, D.F. Zhang140,, J. Zhang 62b,, J. Zhang6,, K. Zhang 14a,14e,, L. Zhang14c,, P. Zhang14a,14e, R. Zhang171,, S. Zhang 107,, T. Zhang154,, X. Zhang 62c,, X. Zhang62b,, Y. Zhang 62c,5,, Y. Zhang97,, Z. Zhang 17a,, Z. Zhang66,, H. Zhao 139,, P. Zhao51,, T. Zhao 62b,, Y. Zhao137,, Z. Zhao62a,, A. Zhemchugov 38,, K. Zheng163,, X. Zheng 62a,, Z. Zheng144,, D. Zhong 163,, B. Zhou107, H. Zhou7,, N. Zhou 62c,, Y. Zhou7, C.G. Zhu 62b,, J. Zhu107,, Y. Zhu 62c,, Y. Zhu62a,, X. Zhuang 14a,, K. Zhukov37,, V. Zhulanov 37,, N.I. Zimine38,, J. Zinsser 63b,, M. Ziolkowski142,, L. Živkovi´ c15,, A. Zoccoli23b,23a,, K. Zoch 56,, T.G. Zorbas140,, O. Zormpa 46,, W. Zou41,, L. Zwalinski 36, 1Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide; Australia 2Department of Physics, University of Alberta, Edmonton AB; Canada 3(a)Department of Physics, Ankara University, Ankara; (b)Division of Physics, TOBB University of Economics and Technology, Ankara; Türkiye 4LAPP, Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS/IN2P3, Annecy; France 5APC, Université Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris; France 6High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne IL; United States of America 7Department of Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson AZ; United States of America 8Department of Physics, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington TX; United States of America 9Physics Department, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens; Greece 10 Physics Department, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou; Greece 11 Department of Physics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX; United States of America 12 Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku; Azerbaijan 13 Institut de Física d’Altes Energies (IFAE), Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Barcelona; Spain 14 (a)Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing; (b)Physics Department, Tsinghua University, Beijing; (c)Department of Physics, Nanjing University, Nanjing; (d)School of Science, Shenzhen Campus of Sun Yat-sen University China; (e)University of Chinese Academy of Science (UCAS), Beijing; China 15 Institute of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade; Serbia 16 Department for Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen; Norway 17 (a)Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley CA; (b)University of California, Berkeley CA; United States of America 18 Institut für Physik, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Berlin; Germany 19 Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics and Laboratory for High Energy Physics, University of Bern, Bern; Switzerland 20 School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham; United Kingdom 21 (a)Department of Physics, Bogazici University, Istanbul; (b)Department of Physics Engineering, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep; (c)Department of Physics, Istanbul University, Istanbul; Türkiye 22 (a)Facultad de Ciencias y Centro de Investigaciónes, Universidad Antonio Nariño, Bogotá; (b)Departamento de Física, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá; Colombia 23 (a)Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia A. Righi, Università di Bologna, Bologna; (b)INFN Sezione di Bologna; Italy 24 Physikalisches Institut, Universität Bonn, Bonn; Germany 25 Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston MA; United States of America 26 Department of Physics, Brandeis University, Waltham MA; United States of America 27 (a)Transilvania University of Brasov, Brasov; (b)Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest; (c)Department of Physics, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Iasi; (d)National Institute for Research and Development of Isotopic and Molecular Technologies, Physics Department, Cluj-Napoca; (e)University Politehnica Bucharest, Bucharest; (f)West University in Timisoara, Timisoara; (g)Faculty of Physics, University of Bucharest, Bucharest; Romania 28 (a)Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava; (b)Department of Subnuclear Physics, Institute of Experimental Physics of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Kosice; Slovak Republic 29 Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton NY; United States of America 30 Universidad de Buenos Aires, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Departamento de Física, y CONICET, Instituto de Física de Buenos Aires (IFIBA), Buenos Aires; Argentina 31 California State University, CA; United States of America 32 Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge; United Kingdom 33 (a)Department of Physics, University of Cape Town, Cape Town; (b)iThemba Labs, Western Cape; (c)Department of Mechanical Engineering Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg; (d)National Institute of Physics, University of the Philippines Diliman (Philippines); (e)University of South Africa, Department of Physics, Pretoria; (f)University of Zululand, KwaDlangezwa; (g)School of Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg; South Africa 34 Department of Physics, Carleton University, Ottawa ON; Canada 35 (a)Faculté des Sciences Ain Chock, Réseau Universitaire de Physique des Hautes Energies -Université Hassan II, Casablanca; (b)Faculté des Sciences, Université Ibn-Tofail, Kénitra; (c)Faculté des Sciences Semlalia, Université Cadi Ayyad, LPHEA-Marrakech; (d)LPMR, Faculté des Sciences, Université Mohamed Premier, Oujda; (e)Faculté des sciences, Université Mohammed V, Rabat; (f)Institute of Applied Physics, Mohammed VI Polytechnic University, Ben Guerir; Morocco 36 CERN, Geneva; Switzerland 37 Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN 38 Affiliated with an international laboratory covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN 39 Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago IL; United States of America 40 LPC, Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, Clermont-Ferrand; France 41 Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington NY; United States of America 42 Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen; Denmark 43 (a)Dipartimento di Fisica, Università della Calabria, Rende; (b)INFN Gruppo Collegato di Cosenza, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati; Italy 44 Physics Department, Southern Methodist University, Dallas TX; United States of America 45 Physics Department, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX; United States of America 46 National Centre for Scientific Research “Demokritos”, Agia Paraskevi; Greece 47 (a)Department of Physics, Stockholm University; (b)Oskar Klein Centre, Stockholm; Sweden 48 Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg and Zeuthen; Germany 49 Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund; Germany 50 Institut für Kernund Teilchenphysik, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden; Germany 51 Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham NC; United States of America 52 SUPA - School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh; United Kingdom 53 INFN e Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati; Italy Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 22 The ATLAS Collaboration 54 Physikalisches Institut, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Freiburg; Germany 55 II. Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen; Germany 56 Département de Physique Nucléaire et Corpusculaire, Université de Genève, Genève; Switzerland 57 (a)Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Genova, Genova; (b)INFN Sezione di Genova; Italy 58 II. Physikalisches Institut, Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen, Giessen; Germany 59 SUPA - School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow; United Kingdom 60 LPSC, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS/IN2P3, Grenoble INP, Grenoble; France 61 Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Harvard University, Cambridge MA; United States of America 62 (a)Department of Modern Physics and State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei; (b)Institute of Frontier and Interdisciplinary Science and Key Laboratory of Particle Physics and Particle Irradiation (MOE), Shandong University, Qingdao; (c)School of Physics and Astronomy, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Key Laboratory for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology (MOE), SKLPPC, Shanghai; (d)Tsung-Dao Lee Institute, Shanghai; China 63 (a)Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg; (b)Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg; Germany 64 (a)Department of Physics, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong; (b)Department of Physics, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; (c)Department of Physics and Institute for Advanced Study, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong; China 65 Department of Physics, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu; Taiwan 66 IJCLab, Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, 91405, Orsay; France 67 Centro Nacional de Microelectrónica (IMB-CNM-CSIC), Barcelona; Spain 68 Department of Physics, Indiana University, Bloomington IN; United States of America 69 (a)INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Sezione di Trieste, Udine; (b)ICTP, Trieste; (c)Dipartimento Politecnico di Ingegneria e Architettura, Università di Udine, Udine; Italy 70 (a)INFN Sezione di Lecce; (b)Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università del Salento, Lecce; Italy 71 (a)INFN Sezione di Milano; (b)Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Milano, Milano; Italy 72 (a)INFN Sezione di Napoli; (b)Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Napoli, Napoli; Italy 73 (a)INFN Sezione di Pavia; (b)Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Pavia, Pavia; Italy 74 (a)INFN Sezione di Pisa; (b)Dipartimento di Fisica E. Fermi, Università di Pisa, Pisa; Italy 75 (a)INFN Sezione di Roma; (b)Dipartimento di Fisica, Sapienza Università di Roma, Roma; Italy 76 (a)INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata; (b)Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma; Italy 77 (a)INFN Sezione di Roma Tre; (b)Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università Roma Tre, Roma; Italy 78 (a)INFN-TIFPA; (b)Università degli Studi di Trento, Trento; Italy 79 Universität Innsbruck, Department of Astro and Particle Physics, Innsbruck; Austria 80 University of Iowa, Iowa City IA; United States of America 81 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames IA; United States of America 82 Istinye University, Sariyer, Istanbul; Türkiye 83 (a)Departamento de Engenharia Elétrica, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (UFJF), Juiz de Fora; (b)Universidade Federal do Rio De Janeiro COPPE/EE/IF, Rio de Janeiro; (c)Instituto de Física, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo; (d)Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro; Brazil 84 KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba; Japan 85 Graduate School of Science, Kobe University, Kobe; Japan 86 (a)AGH University of Krakow, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Krakow; (b)Marian Smoluchowski Institute of Physics, Jagiellonian University, Krakow; Poland 87 Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow; Poland 88 Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto; Japan 89 Kyoto University of Education, Kyoto; Japan 90 Research Center for Advanced Particle Physics and Department of Physics, Kyushu University, Fukuoka; Japan 91 Instituto de Física La Plata, Universidad Nacional de La Plata and CONICET, La Plata; Argentina 92 Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster; United Kingdom 93 Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool; United Kingdom 94 Department of Experimental Particle Physics, Jožef Stefan Institute and Department of Physics, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana; Slovenia 95 School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary University of London, London; United Kingdom 96 Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham; United Kingdom 97 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London; United Kingdom 98 Louisiana Tech University, Ruston LA; United States of America 99 Fysiska institutionen, Lunds universitet, Lund; Sweden 100 Departamento de Física Teorica C-15 and CIAFF, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid; Spain 101 Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz; Germany 102 School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester; United Kingdom 103 CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université, CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille; France 104 Department of Physics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA; United States of America 105 Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal QC; Canada 106 School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria; Australia 107 Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI; United States of America 108 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing MI; United States of America 109 Group of Particle Physics, University of Montreal, Montreal QC; Canada 110 Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München; Germany 111 Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München; Germany 112 Graduate School of Science and Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute, Nagoya University, Nagoya; Japan 113 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM; United States of America 114 Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud University/Nikhef, Nijmegen; Netherlands 115 Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam; Netherlands 116 Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb IL; United States of America 117 (a)New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi; (b)University of Sharjah, Sharjah; United Arab Emirates 118 Department of Physics, New York University, New York NY; United States of America 119 Ochanomizu University, Otsuka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo; Japan 120 Ohio State University, Columbus OH; United States of America 121 Homer L. Dodge Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Oklahoma, Norman OK; United States of America 122 Department of Physics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater OK; United States of America 123 Palacký University, Joint Laboratory of Optics, Olomouc; Czech Republic 124 Institute for Fundamental Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR; United States of America 125 Graduate School of Science, Osaka University, Osaka; Japan 126 Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo; Norway 127 Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford; United Kingdom 128 LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Université Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris; France 129 Department of Physics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA; United States of America Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 23 The ATLAS Collaboration 130 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh PA; United States of America 131 (a)Laboratório de Instrumentação e Física Experimental de Partículas -LIP, Lisboa; (b)Departamento de Física, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa; (c)Departamento de Física, Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra; (d)Centro de Física Nuclear da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa; (e)Departamento de Física, Universidade do Minho, Braga; (f)Departamento de Física Teórica y del Cosmos, Universidad de Granada, Granada (Spain); (g)Departamento de Física, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa; Portugal 132 Institute of Physics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague; Czech Republic 133 Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague; Czech Republic 134 Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Prague; Czech Republic 135 Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot; United Kingdom 136 IRFU, CEA, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette; France 137 Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz CA; United States of America 138 (a)Departamento de Física, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago; (b)Millennium Institute for Subatomic physics at high energy frontier (SAPHIR), Santiago; (c)Instituto de Investigación Multidisciplinario en Ciencia y Tecnología, y Departamento de Física, Universidad de La Serena; (d)Universidad Andres Bello, Department of Physics, Santiago; (e)Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica; (f)Departamento de Física, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Valparaíso; Chile 139 Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle WA; United States of America 140 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield; United Kingdom 141 Department of Physics, Shinshu University, Nagano; Japan 142 Department Physik, Universität Siegen, Siegen; Germany 143 Department of Physics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby BC; Canada 144 SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford CA; United States of America 145 Department of Physics, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm; Sweden 146 Departments of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook NY; United States of America 147 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sussex, Brighton; United Kingdom 148 School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney; Australia 149 Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei; Taiwan 150 (a)E. Andronikashvili Institute of Physics, Iv. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi; (b)High Energy Physics Institute, Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi; (c)University of Georgia, Tbilisi; Georgia 151 Department of Physics, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa; Israel 152 Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv; Israel 153 Department of Physics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki; Greece 154 International Center for Elementary Particle Physics and Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Tokyo; Japan 155 Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo; Japan 156 Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto ON; Canada 157 (a)TRIUMF, Vancouver BC; (b)Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Toronto ON; Canada 158 Division of Physics and Tomonaga Center for the History of the Universe, Faculty of Pure and Applied Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba; Japan 159 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts University, Medford MA; United States of America 160 United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain; United Arab Emirates 161 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine CA; United States of America 162 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Uppsala, Uppsala; Sweden 163 Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana IL; United States of America 164 Instituto de Física Corpuscular (IFIC), Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia -CSIC, Valencia; Spain 165 Department of Physics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC; Canada 166 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria BC; Canada 167 Fakultät für Physik und Astronomie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg; Germany 168 Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry; United Kingdom 169 Waseda University, Tokyo; Japan 170 Department of Particle Physics and Astrophysics, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot; Israel 171 Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison WI; United States of America 172 Fakultät für Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften, Fachgruppe Physik, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal; Germany 173 Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven CT; United States of America aAlso Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN. bAlso at An-Najah National University, Nablus; Palestine. cAlso at Borough of Manhattan Community College, City University of New York, New York NY; United States of America. dAlso at Center for High Energy Physics, Peking University; China. eAlso at Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Innovation (CIRI-AUTH), Thessaloniki; Greece. fAlso at Centro Studi e Ricerche Enrico Fermi; Italy. gAlso at CERN, Geneva; Switzerland. hAlso at Département de Physique Nucléaire et Corpusculaire, Université de Genève, Genève; Switzerland. iAlso at Departament de Fisica de la Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona; Spain. jAlso at Department of Financial and Management Engineering, University of the Aegean, Chios; Greece. kAlso at Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing MI; United States of America. lAlso at Department of Physics, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva; Israel. mAlso at Department of Physics, California State University, Sacramento; United States of America. nAlso at Department of Physics, King’s College London, London; United Kingdom. oAlso at Department of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford CA; United States of America. pAlso at Department of Physics, University of Fribourg, Fribourg; Switzerland. qAlso at Department of Physics, University of Thessaly; Greece. rAlso at Department of Physics, Westmont College, Santa Barbara; United States of America. sAlso at Hellenic Open University, Patras; Greece. tAlso at Institucio Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avancats, ICREA, Barcelona; Spain. uAlso at Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg; Germany. vAlso at Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy (INRNE) of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia; Bulgaria. wAlso at Institute of Applied Physics, Mohammed VI Polytechnic University, Ben Guerir; Morocco. xAlso at Institute of Particle Physics (IPP); Canada. yAlso at Institute of Physics and Technology, Ulaanbaatar; Mongolia. zAlso at Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku; Azerbaijan. aa Also at Institute of Theoretical Physics, Ilia State University, Tbilisi; Georgia. ab Also at L2IT, Université de Toulouse, CNRS/IN2P3, UPS, Toulouse; France. ac Also at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore; United States of America. ad Also at National Institute of Physics, University of the Philippines Diliman (Philippines); Philippines. Physics Letters B 848 (2024) 138400 24 The ATLAS Collaboration ae Also at Technical University of Munich, Munich; Germany. af Also at The Collaborative Innovation Center of Quantum Matter (CICQM), Beijing; China. ag Also at TRIUMF, Vancouver BC; Canada. ah Also at Università di Napoli Parthenope, Napoli; Italy. ai Also at University of Colorado Boulder, Department of Physics, Colorado; United States of America. aj Also at Washington College, Chestertown, MD; United States of America. ak Also at Yeditepe University, Physics Department, Istanbul; Türkiye. ∗Deceased.