Inclusive and differential cross-sections for dilepton tt¯ production measured in √s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector

JHEP07(2023)141 Published for SISSA by Springer Received:March 28, 2023 Accepted:June 9, 2023 Published:July 17, 2023 Inclusive and differential cross-sections for dilepton t¯ t production measured in √s= 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector The ATLAS collaboration E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: Differential and double-differential distributions of kinematic variables of leptons from decays of top-quark pairs (t¯ t) are measured using the full LHC Run 2 data sample collected with the ATLAS detector. The data were collected at a pp collision energy of √s= 13 TeV and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 140 fb−1. The measurements use events containing an oppositely charged eµ pair and b-tagged jets. The results are compared with predictions from several Monte Carlo generators. While no prediction is found to be consistent with all distributions, a better agreement with measurements of the lepton pTdistributions is obtained by reweighting the t¯ tsample so as to reproduce the topquark pTdistribution from an NNLO calculation. The inclusive top-quark pair production cross-section is measured as well, both in a fiducial region and in the full phase-space. The total inclusive cross-section is found to be σt¯ t= 829 ±1 (stat)±13 (syst)±8 (lumi)±2 (beam)pb, where the uncertainties are due to statistics, systematic effects, the integrated luminosity and the beam energy. This is in excellent agreement with the theoretical expectation. Keywords: Hadron-Hadron Scattering, Top Physics ArXiv ePrint: 2303.15340 Open Access, Copyright CERN, for the benefit of the ATLAS Collaboration. Article funded by SCOAP3. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2023)141 JHEP07(2023)141 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 ATLAS detector 3 3 Data and simulated event samples 3 3.1 t¯ tsignal samples 4 3.2 Wt samples 5 3.3 Other background samples 5 4 Object reconstruction and event selection 6 5 Data-driven background estimates and efficiency corrections 8 6 Cross-section determination 12 6.1 Differential fiducial cross-sections 13 6.2 Total fiducial cross-section 14 6.3 Total inclusive cross-section 15 6.4 Validation of the analysis method 16 7 Systematic and statistical uncertainties 16 7.1 Detector-related uncertainties 17 7.2 Top-quark pair modelling uncertainties 17 7.3 Background modelling uncertainties 18 7.4 Luminosity and beam energy 19 8 Results 21 8.1 Total inclusive cross-section 21 8.2 Differential cross-section 21 8.3 Comparison with predictions 31 9 Conclusion 32 A Tables with detailed results 35 The ATLAS collaboration 58 – 1 – JHEP07(2023)141 1 Introduction The top quark is the heaviest known elementary particle and studying its properties is a major goal of the ATLAS experiment [1–3] at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Precise measurements of top-quark pair production in high-energy proton-proton (pp) collisions provide sensitive probes of quantum chromodynamics (QCD), particularly parton distribution functions (PDFs). For the measurement of the top-quark pair production cross-section, the decay channel t¯ t→W+W−b¯ bwith subsequent leptonic decays of the W bosons is of particular interest since, compared to the hadronic channels, it is minimally affected by QCD modelling uncertainties. Previous ATLAS measurements of lepton crosssections based on events containing an eµ pair with opposite electric charges and one or two b-tagged jets (jets likely to originate from a b-quark) include measurements using pp collision events at centre-of-mass energies √s= 7–8 TeV [4,5] and √s= 13 TeV [6]. The latter measurement was based on data collected during 2015–16, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36 fb−1. The same analysis technique is applied here to the entire 13 TeV data sample from LHC Run 2, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 140fb−1. Similar measurements have also been performed by the CMS Collaboration at √s= 13 TeV [7–9]. The large integrated luminosity of the Run 2 data sample allows the lepton differential distributions to be measured over a wider range and with finer granularity than in ref. [6]. The differential distributions of eight kinematic variables of the two leptons are studied: •p` T, the single-lepton transverse momentum1(`=eor µ); •|η`|, the single-lepton pseudorapidity; •meµ, the eµ system invariant mass; •peµ T, the eµ system transverse momentum; •|yeµ|, the eµ system rapidity; •Ee+Eµ, the sum of lepton energies; •pe T+pµ T, the scalar sum of lepton transverse momenta; •|∆φeµ|, the azimuthal angular separation of the leptons. Both the absolute differential cross-sections and the normalised distributions of these variables, defined at particle level, are presented in a fiducial region given by p` T>27 (25) GeV for the leading (sub-leading) lepton and |η`|<2.5after applying the overlap removal procedure described in section 4. Four double-differential distributions are measured as well: |yeµ|in bins of meµ, and |∆φeµ|in bins of meµ,peµ Tand Ee+Eµ. 1ATLAS uses a right-handed coordinate system with its origin at the nominal interaction point (IP) in the centre of the detector and the z-axis along the beam pipe. The x-axis points from the IP to the centre 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 ∆R≡p(∆η)2+ (∆φ)2. – 2 – JHEP07(2023)141 The differential and double-differential distributions are compared with predictions from various models of top-quark production in pp collisions and can later be used to constrain model parameters, such as the strong coupling constant αs, the top-quark mass mtor the PDFs [6,8]. The inclusive cross-section for the production of top-quark pairs decaying into an oppositely charged eµ pair in the fiducial region is also measured, as well as the total inclusive t¯ tcross-section. These measurements make use of recent updates to the luminosity determination and a significant reduction in the luminosity uncertainty at Run 2 [10]. 2 ATLAS detector The ATLAS experiment at the LHC is a multipurpose particle detector with a forwardbackward symmetric cylindrical geometry and a near 4πcoverage in solid angle. It consists of an inner tracking detector surrounded by a thin superconducting solenoid providing a 2 T axial magnetic field, electromagnetic and hadron calorimeters, and a muon spectrometer. 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 field integral of the toroids ranges between 2.0and 6.0 T m 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 1 kHz on average depending on the data-taking conditions. An extensive software suite [11] is used in data simulation, 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 simulated event samples For this analysis, proton-proton collision events collected during Run 2 of the LHC (2015– 2018) with the ATLAS detector are required to pass the single-electron or single-muon triggers [12–14], which are highly efficient for leptons with p` T>27 GeV. After all quality criteria [15] have been applied, the data recorded in Run 2 correspond to an integrated luminosity of 140 fb−1with an uncertainty of 0.83% [10]. To aid the analysis, simulated Monte Carlo (MC) samples were produced using either the full ATLAS detector simulation [16] based on the Geant4 framework [17] or, for the estimation of some of the systematic uncertainties, a faster simulation with parameterised showers in the calorimeters [18]. – 3 – JHEP07(2023)141 The effect of multiple interactions in the same and neighbouring bunch crossings (pileup) was modelled by overlaying each hard-scattering event with inelastic pp collisions generated with Pythia 8.186 [19] using the NNPDF2.3 set of PDFs [20] and the A3 set of tuned parameters [21]. The EvtGen 1.6.0 program [22] is used for properties of the bottom and charm hadron decays. 3.1 t ¯ tsignal samples The nominal sample used to model t¯ tevents was produced using the next-to-leading-order (NLO) matrix element generator Powheg Box [23–26] with the NNPDF3.0 PDF set [27], interfaced to Pythia 8.230 [28,29] with the A14 tune [30] and the NNPDF2.3 PDF sets [20] for the underlying event, parton shower and fragmentation. The hdamp parameter was set to 1.5·mt[31], with mtset to 172.5GeV, and both the renormalisation scale µdefault rand the factorization scale µdefault fwere set equal to the top-quark transverse mass.2 Several modifications of Powheg+Pythia 8.230 are used to assess systematic uncertainties arising from assumptions in the simulation. Variations in the level of initial-state radiation (ISR) are performed by using the internal “Var3cUp” (“Var3cDown”) weight [30] together with the renormalisation (µr) and factorisation (µf) scales set to half (twice) the default values. In two additional samples, the same configurations adopted for the ISR variation sample are used together with a change in the hdamp parameter (doubled to be 3.0·mt) [32]. These new samples are labelled “Rad up” and “Rad down” and used only in the generator-data comparison. Final-state radiation (FSR) is varied by changing the αFSR sparameter, controlling the FSR emissions in Pythia 8.230. The PDF uncertainties are estimated with the 30 components of the Hessian PDF4LHC15 error set [33–35]. The uncertainty associated with the matrix element generation is estimated using MadGraph5_aMC@NLO [36] interfaced with Pythia 8.230 as an alternative generator, with the A14 tune and the NNPDF2.3 set of PDFs for the underlying event, parton shower and fragmentation. Since the “matrix element correction” (MEC) in Pythia 8.230 is switched off in this simulation [37], a sample of Powheg+Pythia 8.230 events with MEC switched off, with the same PDF sets as the nominal Powheg+Pythia 8.230 generator, was also produced for comparison with MadGraph5_aMC@NLO. In order to estimate the uncertainty associated with the modelling of fragmentation and parton showering, a sample was generated with Powheg interfaced with Herwig 7.0.4 [38,39] with the H7UE tune [40] and the NNPDF3.0 PDF set. Additional samples using alternative generators were produced for comparison with data. These include Powheg interfaced with Herwig 7.1.3 [41], MadGraph5_aMC@NLO interfaced with Herwig 7.1.3, and Powheg+Pythia 8.230 with the PDF4LHC15_nnlo_mc set [33,42]. Finally, a reweighted Powheg+Pythia 8.230 sample was generated. The reweighting is performed on the top-quark pTvariable, using the kinematics of the top quarks in the MC sample after initialand final-state radiation. The prediction for the top-quark pTspectrum is calculated to next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) in QCD with NLO EW corrections [43,44] with the NNPDF3.0 QED PDF 2µr=µf=q(m2 t+ (p2 T,t +p2 T,¯ t)/2where pT,t/¯ tis the transverse momentum of the top (anti-top) quark. – 4 – JHEP07(2023)141 set using dynamic renormalisation and factorisation scales mT,t/2, i.e. half the top-quark transverse mass,3for the top-quark pTas proposed in ref. [43], with mt= 173.3GeV. The reweighting was applied such that at the end of the procedure the reweighted MC sample is in good agreement with the higher-order prediction for the reweighted variable [45]. This sample is referred to as being reweighted to the NNLO prediction in the remainder of the document. The measurements are sensitive to the fraction of t¯ tevents produced together with extra heavy-flavour quarks, which is not well modelled. This extra production of heavy flavour, relative to the prediction, is studied with a modified Powheg+Pythia 8.230 sample in which the fraction of events with at least three b-jets at generator level is increased by 30% to reproduce the rate of events in data with three b-tagged jets, as discussed in ref. [6]. When comparing simulation with data, the t¯ tsamples are normalised to the inclusive cross-section prediction calculated at NNLO accuracy in the strong coupling constant αs, including the resummation of next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic (NNLL) soft gluon terms, σt¯ t,pred = 832+20 −29(scale)+35 −35(PDF+αs) pb, obtained using the Top++ 2.0 program [46–50]. 3.2 W t samples In order to describe the dominant background from the single-top Wt channel, samples were produced with Powheg+Pythia 8.230 with the same parameter values as used for the nominal t¯ tsample. The interference between the t¯ tand Wt amplitudes is modelled using the diagram removal scheme [51,52]. To estimate the systematic uncertainties from this source, an alternative sample is used, where the interference is modelled with the diagram subtraction scheme [51]. The same variations of Powheg Box that were performed for the nominal t¯ tsample were also carried out for the Wt sample. The same alternative generators are also used to estimate the hard-scattering matrix element and parton shower plus hadronisation uncertainties in the Wt background. 3.3 Other background samples The background from diboson events (WW,WZ and ZZ) was simulated using the Sherpa 2.2.2 [53–55] generator with the NNPDF3.0 PDF set. These simulations are accurate to NLO for up to one additional parton and accurate to leading order (LO) for up to three additional parton emissions. Another background contribution comes from Z+jets with the Zboson decaying into two τ-leptons, which then decay to an electron and a muon. Those samples were simulated with the Sherpa 2.2.1 generator with the NNPDF3.0 PDF set. They are accurate to NLO for up to two additional partons and accurate to LO for up to four additional partons, and so are the Z(→ee)+ jets and Z(→µµ)+ jets samples which are used to extract a factor to scale the Z(→ττ)+jets background to data; see section 5for details. To study systematic uncertainties in the Z+jets modelling, alternative Z+jets samples were generated with Powheg+Pythia 8.230. 3The transverse mass of the top quark is denoted by mT,t =pm2 t+p2 T,t. – 5 – JHEP07(2023)141 Backgrounds from t¯ tW and t¯ tZ are described by samples simulated with the MadGraph5_aMC@NLO generator at NLO interfaced with Pythia 8.210 with the A14 tune and the NNPDF2.3 PDF set. The minor background coming from t¯ tH was also simulated with the MadGraph5_aMC@NLO NLO generator with the A14 tune and the NNPDF2.3lo PDF set, and the minor single-top contribution from t-channel exchange was simulated with the Powheg+Pythia 8.230 generator with the NNPDF3.0nlo_4f PDF set. For the estimation of the misidentified-lepton backgrounds, the above samples, in which a dileptonic filter is applied, are complemented by top-quark samples and diboson samples containing at least one hadronic top-quark or boson decay, respectively, together with W+jets samples generated with the same set-up as the Z+jets samples. 4 Object reconstruction and event selection The events used in this analysis must contain a reconstructed electron, a reconstructed muon and either one or two b-tagged jets. All reconstructed objects are required to have |η|<2.5and pT>25 GeV. For electrons, the pseudorapidity region is reduced to |η|<1.37 and 1.52 <|η|<2.47 to exclude the transition region between the barrel and endcap calorimeters. Electron candidates are reconstructed from energy clusters in the electromagnetic calorimeter matched to tracks reconstructed in the inner tracking detector [56]. The candidates are required to satisfy “tight” selection criteria. In addition, the candidates are subject to an isolation requirement allowing no more than a certain fraction of the electron energy to be carried by particles measured in the vicinity of the electron candidate. The requirement is passed by 90% of the electrons from Z→ee decays, at pT= 25 GeV. The candidates are also required to originate from the primary event vertex [57], defined as the reconstructed vertex with the highest sum of p2 Tfor the tracks associated with it. The candidate track must satisfy a requirement on the transverse impact parameter significance of |d0|/σd0<5and on the longitudinal impact parameter, z0, of |z0sin(θ)|<0.5mm, where θis the polar angle of the track. Muon candidates are reconstructed by combining tracks reconstructed in the inner tracking detector and the muon spectrometer. They are required to have |η|<2.5, to satisfy “medium” selection criteria [58] and an isolation requirement which has an efficiency of ∼85% for muons with pT=25 GeV, increasing gradually to 98% for muons with pT>100 GeV. Furthermore, the muon candidate tracks must originate from the primary vertex, ensured by requiring |d0|/σd0<3and |z0sin(θ)|<0.5mm. Jets are reconstructed from topological cell clusters [59] in the calorimeters using the anti-ktalgorithm [60,61] with a radius parameter R= 0.4. After calibration of the jet energy scale [62] using information from both data and simulation, the jets are required to have pT>25 GeV and |η|<2.5. In order to reduce contamination from pileup, jets with pT<120 GeV and |η|<2.4must pass a primary vertex association requirement using the “jet vertex tagger” (JVT) [63], which has an efficiency of 87% for jets with pT= 25 GeV, increasing to 95% for jets with pT= 60 GeV. – 6 – JHEP07(2023)141 Jets likely to contain b-hadrons are tagged with the MV2c10 algorithm [64] using jet and track variables sensitive to band c-hadron masses, lifetimes and decay topologies. A working point with an average efficiency of 70% was used, with rejection factors for c-quark jets, τ-leptons and light-quark jets of 8, 13 and 313, respectively. These values are estimated using the t¯ tsimulation. To avoid double counting, an overlap removal procedure is applied. First, any electron candidates that share a track with a muon candidate are removed. Subsequently, jets within ∆R= 0.2of an electron are removed, and afterwards, electrons within a region 0.2<∆R < 0.4around any remaining jet are rejected. Jets that have fewer than three tracks and are within ∆R= 0.2of a muon candidate are removed, and muons within ∆R= 0.4of any remaining jet are discarded. Events are retained if they contain exactly one electron and exactly one muon satisfying the selection criteria detailed above, where at least one of the two leptons is matched to an electron or muon trigger object, which implies a minimum pTof 27 GeV. The events with opposite-charge eµ pairs (opposite-sign, OS) are used for the measurement of the t¯ tsignal, while the same-charge eµ pairs (same-sign, SS) are used to estimate the background from misidentified leptons. Furthermore, the events must contain either exactly one or exactly two b-tagged jets. The selected events containing OS leptons are shown as a function of the number of b-tagged jets in figure 1. The mismodelling of the number of events with three or more b-tagged jets is taken into account using the t¯ tsample with an enriched rate of events with at least three b-jets at generator level, as described in section 3.1. The reconstructed transverse momentum and |η|distributions of the OS leptons in the selected data sample are shown in figures 2and 3together with signal and background predictions. The data and simulated distributions generally agree well, but the lepton transverse momentum distribution observed in data is softer than in the nominal signal and background simulation, as has also been observed in previous measurements at √s= 13 TeV [6,7]. In addition to the reconstructed objects, “particle-level” objects are also defined. These are a collection of stable particles (with lifetime larger than 30 ps) from the full matrix element and parton shower generators, without any simulation of the interaction of these particles with the detector components. Simulated events with an eµ pair located in a fiducial region, given for both leptons by p` T>27 (25) GeV for the leading (sub-leading) lepton and |η`|<2.5at particle-level, are used to extrapolate the observed event rate to a fiducial cross-section. The four-momentum of each charged lepton is taken after final-state radiation and it is summed with the fourmomenta of any radiated photons within a cone of size ∆R= 0.1around the lepton direction. Particle-level jets are reconstructed using stable particles in the event (excluding charged leptons and neutrinos that do not originate from hadron decays) using the anti-kt algorithm with a R parameter of R= 0.4. They are required to have pT>25 GeV and |η|<2.5. Particle-level electrons and muons that overlap with particle jets with ∆R < 0.4 are removed from the event. No electron-muon overlap removal is applied at the particle level. – 7 – JHEP07(2023)141 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 3 10× Events ATLAS opposite signµe -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs Data t t Single top Mis-ID leptons + jetsττ →Z Others Syst error⊕Stat 0 1 2 3≥ Number of b-tagged jets 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 MC/Data Figure 1. Distribution of the number of b-tagged jets in selected opposite-sign eµ events. The coloured distributions show the breakdown of the predicted background contributions from single top quarks (Wt and t-channel), misidentified leptons, Z(→ττ)+jets and other sources of background (diboson, t¯ tW,t¯ tZ, and t¯ tH). The bottom panel shows the ratio of the prediction to the data with an uncertainty band covering both the statistical and systematic uncertainties, except for t¯ tgenerator uncertainties. 5 Data-driven background estimates and efficiency corrections The simulated backgrounds from misidentified leptons and the backgrounds from Z(→ττ)+jets are corrected using data-driven methods. These two backgrounds amount to 1% and 0.2%, respectively, of the total selected event sample. The misidentified-lepton background is composed of five different categories treated together, as shown in the SS regions in figures 4and 5. The major contribution is due to t¯ tdilepton events where the electron stems from the conversion of a photon radiated from a prompt electron. Three more categories are due to an electron or muon coming from the semileptonic decay of heavy-flavour hadrons or one lepton with a wrongly reconstructed charge. The final category, labelled as “Others”, includes all the other cases, e.g. a muon from an in-flight decay of a pion or kaon. – 8 – JHEP07(2023)141 OS SS N1N2N1N2 t¯ t418780 ±130 235937 ±95 — — Single t42944 ±77 7295 ±31 — — Z+jets 1552 ±66 96.5 ±7.5 — — Diboson 1406.1 ±9.5 49.9 ±1.1 223.0 ±2.4 10.58 ±0.30 Charge-misid. lepton 1.90 ±0.14 0.614 ±0.061 858 ±11 364.0 ±7.1 Misidentified lepton 4880 ±100 1990 ±67 2550 ±57 906 ±35 Other 1192.6 ±4.1 807.1 ±3.3 407.0 ±1.7 238.3 ±1.3 Total MC prediction 470760 ±190 246180 ±120 4039 ±58 1519 ±36 Data events 468450 248560 3995 1501 Data/MC 0.995±0.002 1.010±0.002 0.989±0.021 0.988±0.035 Table 1. Observed number of events in data and expected number of events for each process. N1and N2are the numbers of events with one b-tagged jet and two b-tagged jets, respectively, for the opposite-sign (OS) and same-sign (SS) regions. The t¯ t+X(X=W,Z,H) contributions are included in “Other”. Misidentified lepton events in this table are divided in two categories: “Charge-misid. lepton” refers to the number of events with one wrong-charge reconstructed lepton while “Misidentified lepton” refers to the other four categories combined, estimated as explained in section 5and shown in figures 4and 5. The dashes mean that the expected number of events for that process is compatible with zero (given the statistical power of the prediction used). The uncertainties in the ratios of data to MC events are purely statistical. The sum of the individual contributions may differ from the “Total MC prediction” due to rounding. 6.3 Total inclusive cross-section In order to obtain the inclusive cross-section, the reconstruction efficiency Geµ in eq. (6.1) is replaced by Eeµ =Aeµ ·Geµ. The acceptance Aeµ is defined as Aeµ =Nt¯ t,fiducial eµ Nt¯ t,(6.2) where Nt¯ t,fiducial eµ is the number of particle-level opposite-sign eµ events found in the fiducial region in a simulated t¯ tsample and Nt¯ tis the total number of t¯ tpairs produced by the t¯ tgenerator. The acceptance factor is taken from the same MC t¯ tsample used to calculate the reconstruction efficiency and it is corrected for each generator to conform with the Wbranching ratio predicted by the Standard Model per lepton flavour, B(W→`ν) = 10.82% [66]. The value of Eeµ calculated with the nominal t¯ t Powheg+Pythia 8.230 sample is Eeµ = (0.7251 ±0.0003)%, while the value of the acceptance Aeµ calculated with the same sample is Aeµ = (1.2708 ±0.0004)%, where the uncertainties are purely statistical. – 15 – JHEP07(2023)141 6.4 Validation of the analysis method The method used to solve eq. (6.1) for each leptonic kinematic bin iis validated by replacing the data sample by 1000 pseudo-experiments [67] fluctuating Ni 1and Ni 2within their statistical uncertainties in various simulated event samples with known t¯ tcross-sections, σi true. In practice, this is done with a “bootstrapping method” [68], assigning to each event a set of 1000 weights obtained from fluctuations of a Poisson distribution with a mean value of one. In all such validations, the parameters of the equation, Gi eµ,Ci band the background contributions, are taken from the nominal signal and background samples. The mean of the 1000 cross-sections derived from eq. (6.1) is then compared with the true t¯ tcross-section of the simulated event sample in order to check for possible biases in the method. The following simulated event samples are used for validation: •The nominal t¯ tPowheg+Pythia 8.230 sample. The mean measured cross-section equals the true cross-section within the statistical error on the mean in any bin i. •Half the nominal t¯ tPowheg+Pythia 8.230 sample. Here the parameters of eq. (6.1) are evaluated with the other half of the sample. No bias is seen beyond the expected statistical fluctuations. •Two t¯ tPowheg+Pythia 8.230 samples with the top-quark mass changed to 176 GeV and 169 GeV. In the case of mt= 169 GeV, biases of 1%–2% are seen in some kinematic bins, but in general the biases are smaller than the expected statistical uncertainties of the data and hence neglected. •The nominal t¯ tPowheg+Pythia 8.230 sample reweighted to produce the same Ni 1 and Ni 2as in the data. As in the other tests, no significant bias away from the true cross-section is seen. The bootstrapping method is also applied to both the data and simulated event samples in order to construct the covariance matrices of statistical uncertainties of the measurements. The matrices include non-zero off-diagonal elements between different variables and, in the case of normalised differential distributions, also between bins in the same distribution. 7 Systematic and statistical uncertainties Uncertainties due to theoretical assumptions and detector modelling affect the parameters L,Gi eµ,Ci b,Ni 1,bkg and Ni 2,bkg of eq. (6.1). Uncertainties associated with generators are evaluated by changing the values of parameters in the simulations or by using alternative generators. Some background uncertainties are evaluated by using data-driven uncertainty estimates, as explained in section 7.3. For each variation, eq. (6.1) is solved and the change with respect to the baseline sample is assigned as the impact of the uncertainty on the cross-section measurement. Effects of finite data and MC sample sizes are evaluated by the bootstrapping method described in section 6.4 and summarised in a covariance matrix covering all measured kinematic bins. The individual sources of systematic uncertainty are discussed in the following subsections and a summary of their impact in the measured fiducial and total inclusive cross-sections is given in table 3. – 16 – JHEP07(2023)141 7.1 Detector-related uncertainties Uncertainties on the trigger [13,14], reconstruction and selection efficiency [56,58] for the leptons are estimated using Z→ee and Z→µµ events in data. They are expressed as uncertainties in scale factors for the MC predictions, described in section 5. By varying the scale factors, their uncertainties are propagated to Gi eµ and Ci b, as well as the number of background events, and eq. (6.1) is solved for each variation. The “up” and “down” variations are applied coherently to all bins of a given kinematic variable, except for the electron efficiency, where this approach overestimates the uncertainties [56]. The latter variations are carried out separately in two |η|bins and nine pTbins and their effects are combined, taking measured bin-to-bin correlations into account. The up and down variations of the lepton isolation efficiency scale factors are calculated using t¯ t→WbWb → eνbµνb events. These variations take into account uncertainties in the isolation efficiencies for data and MC. The uncertainty on the isolation efficiency for data depends on the estimation of events with a misidentified lepton and on the statistical uncertainty, while the uncertainty for the MC depends on the simulated sample size. The uncertainty on the jet energy scale (JES) and the jet energy resolution (JER) affect i b,Ci band the number of background events, mainly from Wt production. The jet-related uncertainties are evaluated using the Z+ jets, γ+ jet and multijet samples at √s= 13 TeV for both real and simulated data [69]. A total of 20 uncorrelated nuisance parameters affecting the JES and five parameters affecting the JER are varied up and down. The difference between the energy response for reconstructed b-jets and that for other jets is varied separately [69] and the maximum possible variation is applied to the flavour composition of the jets (the mixture of quarks and gluons). The modelling of pileup also affects the jet energy, and the associated uncertainty is found by varying the jet energy up and down by the uncertainty in this effect. The jet vertex association efficiency uncertainty affects the Ci bcoefficient. This is evaluated by changing the JVT scale factor up and down within its uncertainty. Ab-tagging efficiency scale factor for the chosen working point is derived from t¯ t events [70] and applied to the Monte Carlo events used in the present analysis. The uncertainties are related to the b-jet tagging calibration for b-jets, c-jets and light-jets, and comprise nine, four and five eigenvector variations to the tagging efficiencies, respectively, and two components for the MC-based extrapolation to jets with very high pT. 7.2 Top-quark pair modelling uncertainties Uncertainties related to the modelling of t¯ tevents have an impact on Gi eµ and Ci bin eq. (6.1) and on the acceptance factor in eq. (6.2). These uncertainties are calculated with alternative t¯ tsamples or by reweighting the nominal sample or increasing by 30% the fraction of events with at least three b-jets, as described in section 3.1. The effect on Eeµ, Geµ and Cbin the selected sample is summarised in table 2and the change in the central value is taken as the uncertainty from each source. As shown in section 8.2, the Powheg+Pythia 8.230 generator does not give a good description of the lepton transverse momentum, which is believed to be a reflection of the – 17 – JHEP07(2023)141 Systematic uncertainty name ∆Cb/Cb[%] ∆Geµ/Geµ [%] ∆Eeµ/Eeµ [%] Matrix element −0.10 ±0.22 0.25 ±0.11 0.29 ±0.12 hdamp −0.06 ±0.08 −0.05 ±0.04 −0.05 ±0.05 Parton shower and hadronisation 0.16 ±0.08 −0.26 ±0.04 0.04 ±0.05 Top pTreweighting 0.03 ±0.08 0.22 ±0.04 0.61 ±0.05 t¯ t+ heavy flavour −0.33 ±0.08 0.01 ±0.04 0.01 ±0.05 ISR (high) −0.01 ±0.08 0.06 ±0.04 0.35 ±0.05 ISR (low) 0.04 ±0.08 −0.13 ±0.04 −0.35 ±0.05 FSR (high) 0.05 ±0.09 −0.07 ±0.04 −0.12 ±0.05 FSR (low) −0.09 ±0.15 0.10 ±0.07 0.16 ±0.09 PDF 0.02 ±0.08 0.04 ±0.04 0.42 ±0.05 Table 2. Differences in the total b-tagging correlation coefficient, total reconstruction efficiency and total preselection efficiency between the baseline eµ Powheg+Pythia 8.230 sample and the corresponding t¯ tsystematic uncertainty samples. The PDF row refers to the sum in quadrature of the differences derived from the 30 eigenvectors and the baseline. All uncertainties shown are due to the limited MC sample size. top-quark transverse momentum spectrum. Therefore, the difference with respect to the sample where the top-quark transverse momentum is reweighted to the NNLO predicted spectrum is considered as an additional uncertainty in all measurements. This effect is relevant mostly for the extrapolation of the fiducial cross-section to the total phase-space. The effect of changing the top-quark mass in the t¯ tand Wt simulations is not included in table 2since by convention the inclusive cross-section is quoted at a fixed mt= 172.5GeV. However, samples with different top-quark masses (from mt= 169 GeV to mt= 176 GeV) are used for validation tests and to study the combined effect on the fiducial cross-section (σfid t¯ t) and the total inclusive cross-section. This is found to be 1 σfid t¯ t dσfid t¯ t dmt =−(0.004 ±0.003)%/GeV 1 σt¯ t dσt¯ t dmt =−(0.379 ±0.005)%/GeV 7.3 Background modelling uncertainties The contribution from Wt is varied up and down by the relative uncertainty in the total cross-section, which is 5.3%, as derived to approximate NNLO for √s= 13 TeV using the calculation in ref. [71]. In addition, the nominal W t generator is varied as described in section 3.2 and the results are propagated to the cross-section in each lepton kinematic bin. In particular, the uncertainty due to the interference between the t¯ tand Wt amplitudes is taken as the change in the result when replacing the diagram removal scheme [51,52] with – 18 – JHEP07(2023)141 the diagram subtraction scheme [51]. The uncertainties in the matrix element, fragmentation and parton showering, and those related to the extra initialand final-state radiation in the Wt background process are evaluated together with the signal process, considering these uncertainties to be correlated between t¯ tand Wt. The uncertainties in the size of the diboson background are assessed by doubling and halving the factorisation and renormalisation scales in the Sherpa 2.2.2 samples and by comparing the nominal Sherpa 2.2.2 samples with those generated with Powheg+Pythia 8.210. A further 40% normalisation uncertainty is added to cover the uncertainties due to heavy-flavour jets produced in association with the diboson pairs as discussed in ref. [72]. An uncertainty of 5% on the scale factors for the Z→ττ contribution derived in section 5is considered. The uncertainty from the fit amounts to less than 1%. In order to take into account small differences between the same-flavour ee and µµ control regions and the eµ measurement region, such as lepton efficiencies, a conservative systematic uncertainty of 5% is assigned, both in the one b-jet and the two b-jets regions. An additional uncertainty due to the shape of the Z+jets background is estimated by using the Powheg+Pythia 8.186 sample instead of the nominal Sherpa 2.2.1 sample. The uncertainty assigned to the t¯ tV (where Vis Wor Z) cross-sections is 13%, following ref. [73]. In order to cover possible mismodelling of the electron charge misidentification and the misidentified-lepton composition in the nominal simulation, the ratio of OS to SS misidentified leptons is varied up and down by 25% in the 1-b-jet region and by 50% in the 2b-jet region, as discussed in ref. [6]. The uncertainties in the predicted cross-sections for the t¯ tV and diboson processes also have a non-negligible impact on the number of SS prompt leptons. A conservative uncertainty of 50% is therefore assigned to those contributions [6]. 7.4 Luminosity and beam energy The uncertainty in the combined 2015–2018 integrated luminosity is 0.83% [10], obtained using the LUCID-2 detector [74] for the primary luminosity measurements, complemented by measurements using the inner tracking detector and calorimeters. This is propagated to the cross-sections via eq. (6.1). Including the effect of the luminosity uncertainty on the predicted background contribution, the fiducial and inclusive cross-sections receive a total uncertainty of 0.93% from the measured luminosity. The uncertainty in the LHC beam energy is evaluated to be 0.1% [75], which is found to contribute an uncertainty of 0.23% to the measured total fiducial and inclusive crosssections at √s= 13 TeV. The effect of a 0.1% uncertainty in the LHC beam energy is also propagated to the differential measurements by reweighting the PDFs using the LHAPDF library [76]. The effect is generally small but increases in the highest-energy kinematic bins, reaching a maximum contribution of 0.1% – 19 – JHEP07(2023)141 Source of uncertainty ∆σfid t¯ t/σfid t¯ t[%] ∆σt¯ t/σt¯ t[%] Data statistics 0.15 0.15 MC statistics 0.04 0.04 Matrix element 0.12 0.16 hdamp variation 0.01 0.01 Parton shower 0.08 0.22 t¯ t+ heavy flavour 0.34 0.34 Top pTreweighting 0.19 0.58 Parton distribution functions 0.04 0.43 Initial-state radiation 0.11 0.37 Final-state radiation 0.29 0.35 Electron energy scale 0.10 0.10 Electron efficiency 0.37 0.37 Electron isolation (in situ) 0.51 0.51 Muon momentum scale 0.13 0.13 Muon reconstruction efficiency 0.35 0.35 Muon isolation (in situ) 0.33 0.33 Lepton trigger efficiency 0.05 0.05 Vertex association efficiency 0.03 0.03 Jet energy scale & resolution 0.10 0.10 b-tagging efficiency 0.07 0.07 t¯ t/Wt interference 0.37 0.37 Wt cross-section 0.52 0.52 Diboson background 0.34 0.34 t¯ tV and t¯ tH 0.03 0.03 Z+jets background 0.05 0.05 Misidentified leptons 0.32 0.32 Beam energy 0.23 0.23 Luminosity 0.93 0.93 Total uncertainty 1.6 1.8 Table 3. Breakdown of systematic uncertainties in the measured fiducial and inclusive crosssections. – 20 – JHEP07(2023)141 8 Results 8.1 Total inclusive cross-section The cross-section for the fiducial region is measured with the full Run 2 dataset to be σfid t¯ t= 10.53 ±0.02 (stat)±0.13 (syst)±0.10 (lumi)±0.02 (beam)pb and the total inclusive cross-section is σt¯ t= 829 ±1 (stat)±13 (syst)±8 (lumi)±2 (beam)pb, where the uncertainties are due to statistics, theoretical and experimental systematic effects, the integrated luminosity and the beam energy. The fiducial region is defined as p` T>27 (25) GeV for the leading (sub-leading) lepton and |η`|<2.5after applying the overlap removal procedure described in section 4for both leptons from t¯ tdecays producing an eµ pair. The total relative uncertainties in σfid t¯ tand σt¯ tare 1.6% and 1.8%, respectively, where the breakdown of the various sources is shown in table 3. This measurement is compatible with the earlier ATLAS result at √s= 13 TeV using an integrated luminosity of 36 fb−1[6] but is significantly more precise, due to a reduction in the luminosity uncertainty [10]. It is the most precise measurement of the inclusive t¯ t cross-section to date. The predicted NNLO+NNLL value of the total inclusive crosssection at √s= 13 TeV, for a top-quark mass of 172.5GeV, is σt¯ t,pred = 832+20 −29 (scale)+23 −23 (mt)+35 −35 (PDF+αs) pb [46–50], which is in excellent agreement with this measurement. 8.2 Differential cross-section The differential cross-section is measured as a function of several lepton kinematic variables: p` T,|η`|,meµ,peµ T,|yeµ|,Ee+Eµ,pe T+pµ Tand |∆φeµ|. The absolute differential crosssections in the fiducial region are presented in figures 6and 7, as well as in tables 6–13 in the appendix. The absolute double-differential cross-sections are presented in figures 8and 9, as well as in tables 14–17 in the appendix. The luminosity gives the largest contribution to the cross-section uncertainty in most bins, resulting in a typical uncertainty of 1% out of a total uncertainty around 2%. An uncertainty of around 1% is expected since it affects both the signal and background yields in equation (6.1) and the final impact on the measured crosssection is subject to background fluctuations, having a relative impact on the measurement ranging between 0.9% and 1.1%. However, uncertainties related to the modelling of the t¯ t process, those affecting the reconstruction of leptons and those affecting the modelling of the background processes also have a significant contribution in all bins of the distributions. The statistical uncertainty increases with increasing transverse momentum, combined mass or energy, but is overtaken by the uncertainty related to the interference between t¯ tand Wt amplitudes that dominates the uncertainty in the high mass or energy bins. However, in the normalised differential cross-section the uncertainty due to the luminosity largely cancels out. This results in a typical uncertainty of 1%, except in the highest – 21 – JHEP07(2023)141 energy bins. These results are presented in figures 10 and 11, as well as in tables 18–25 in the appendix. Instead of the luminosity, the interference between t¯ tand Wt amplitudes becomes the most important source of uncertainty, especially for high values of variables with dimensions of energy. The t¯ tmodelling uncertainties are also important, while other uncertainties are very small in the normalised distributions. Due to differences in the fiducial region definition, these results are not directly comparable to the previous results from ref. [6]. The lepton pTrequirement in this analysis, p` T>27 (25) GeV for the leading (sub-leading) lepton, differs from that in the 36 fb−1 analysis [6], in which the minimum lepton pTwas 20 GeV whilst requiring at least one lepton to be above the lepton trigger threshold of 21 −27 GeV. The gain in precision from using the full Run 2 sample is especially significant in the normalised double-differential cross-sections, allowing the binning to have finer granularity than in the previous analysis. The obtained double-differential cross-section measurements as a function of |yeµ|in bins of meµ,|∆φeµ|in bins of meµ,|∆φeµ|in bins of peµ T, and |∆φeµ| in bins of Ee+Eµare presented in figures 12 and 13 and in tables 26–29 in the appendix. – 22 – JHEP07(2023)141 1 10 2 10 3 10 [fb/GeV] T /dpσd Data aMC@NLO+Her7.1.3 Powheg+Herwig7.0.4 Powheg+Pythia8 Powheg+Herwig7.1.3 aMC@NLO+Pythia8 Powheg+Pythia8 (rew.) Stat error Syst error⊕Stat ATLAS -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 [GeV] T Lepton p 0.8 1 1.2 MC/Data (a) 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 |]η | [fb/unit |η/d|σd Data aMC@NLO+Her7.1.3 Powheg+Herwig7.0.4 Powheg+Pythia8 Powheg+Herwig7.1.3 aMC@NLO+Pythia8 Powheg+Pythia8 (rew.) Stat error Syst error⊕Stat ATLAS -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 |ηLepton | 0.95 1 1.05 MC/Data (b) 1 10 2 10 ) [fb/GeV] µ + E e /d(Eσd Data aMC@NLO+Her7.1.3 Powheg+Herwig7.0.4 Powheg+Pythia8 Powheg+Herwig7.1.3 aMC@NLO+Pythia8 Powheg+Pythia8 (rew.) Stat error Syst error⊕Stat ATLAS -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 [GeV] µ + E e E 0.9 1 1.1 MC/Data (c) 1− 10 1 10 2 10 [fb/GeV] µe /dmσd Data aMC@NLO+Her7.1.3 Powheg+Herwig7.0.4 Powheg+Pythia8 Powheg+Herwig7.1.3 aMC@NLO+Pythia8 Powheg+Pythia8 (rew.) Stat error Syst error⊕Stat ATLAS -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 [GeV] µe m 0.9 1 1.1 MC/Data (d) Figure 6. Absolute differential cross-sections as a function of (a) p` T, (b) |η`|, (c) Ee+Eµ and (d) meµ with statistical (orange) and statistical plus systematic uncertainties (yellow). The data points are placed at the centre of each bin. The results are compared with the predictions from different Monte Carlo generators normalised to the Top++ prediction: the baseline Powheg+Pythia 8.230 t¯ tsample (blue), MadGraph5_aMC@NLO+Herwig 7.1.3 (red), Powheg+Herwig 7.0.4 (green), Powheg+Herwig 7.1.3 (purple), MadGraph5_aMC@NLO+Pythia 8.230 (cyan) and Powheg+Pythia 8.230 rew. (dark green), which refers to Powheg+Pythia 8.230 reweighted according to the top-quark pT. The lower panel shows the ratios of the predictions to data, with the bands indicating the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin in (a), (c) and (d) also contains overflow events. – 23 – JHEP07(2023)141 1− 10 1 10 2 10 ) [fb/GeV] µ T + p e T /d(pσd Data aMC@NLO+Her7.1.3 Powheg+Herwig7.0.4 Powheg+Pythia8 Powheg+Herwig7.1.3 aMC@NLO+Pythia8 Powheg+Pythia8 (rew.) Stat error Syst error⊕Stat ATLAS -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs 100 200 300 400 500 600 [GeV] µ T + p e T p 0.8 1 1.2 MC/Data (a) 1 10 2 10 [fb/GeV] µe T /dpσd Data aMC@NLO+Her7.1.3 Powheg+Herwig7.0.4 Powheg+Pythia8 Powheg+Herwig7.1.3 aMC@NLO+Pythia8 Powheg+Pythia8 (rew.) Stat error Syst error⊕Stat ATLAS -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 [GeV] µe T p 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 MC/Data (b) 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 | [fb/rad] µe φ∆/d|σd Data aMC@NLO+Her7.1.3 Powheg+Herwig7.0.4 Powheg+Pythia8 Powheg+Herwig7.1.3 aMC@NLO+Pythia8 Powheg+Pythia8 (rew.) Stat error Syst error⊕Stat ATLAS -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 | µe φ∆| 0.95 1 1.05 MC/Data (c) 2 10 3 10 4 10 | [fb/unit |y|] µe /d|yσd Data aMC@NLO+Her7.1.3 Powheg+Herwig7.0.4 Powheg+Pythia8 Powheg+Herwig7.1.3 aMC@NLO+Pythia8 Powheg+Pythia8 (rew.) Stat error Syst error⊕Stat ATLAS -1 = 13 TeV, 140 fbs 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 | µe |y 0.8 1 1.2 MC/Data (d) Figure 7. Absolute differential cross-sections as a function of (a) pe T+pµ T, (b) peµ T, (c) |∆φeµ| and (d) |yeµ|with statistical (orange) and statistical plus systematic uncertainties (yellow). The data points are placed at the centre of each bin. The results are compared with the predictions from different Monte Carlo generators normalised to the Top++ prediction: the baseline Powheg+Pythia 8.230 t¯ tsample (blue), MadGraph5_aMC@NLO+Herwig 7.1.3 (red), Powheg+Herwig 7.0.4 (green), Powheg+Herwig 7.1.3 (purple), MadGraph5_aMC@NLO+Pythia 8.230 (cyan) and Powheg+Pythia 8.230 rew. (dark green), which refers to Powheg+Pythia 8.230 reweighted according to the top-quark pT. The lower panel shows the ratios of the predictions to data, with the bands indicating the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin in (a) and (b) also contains overflow events. – 24 – JHEP07(2023)141 8.3 Comparison with predictions Defining a vector Vbas the difference between the measured and predicted values for an absolute differential cross-section in bkinematic bins, the compatibility of the data and predictions is assessed by using a χ2test with bdegrees of freedom χ2=VT b·Cov−1 b×b·Vb(8.1) The covariance matrix Covb×bis a sum of several terms. The statistical covariance matrices for both the data and the simulated event sample are calculated with the method described in section 6.4. Each systematic uncertainty contributes another term, where the uncertainties are assumed to be fully correlated between bins, except for the statistical uncertainties of the misidentified-lepton estimate. No uncertainty was assigned to the theoretical prediction. The normalised differential cross-sections have one less degree of freedom and the χ2 is calculated by simply dropping one bin in eq. (8.1) χ2=VT (b−1) ·Cov−1 (b−1)×(b−1) ·V(b−1) The statistical covariance matrix terms are constructed using the same method as for the absolute differential cross-sections, and the systematic covariance matrix contributions are propagated to the normalised differential cross-sections. The resulting combined χ2 for each variable and each t¯ tgenerator set-up are shown in table 4, while those for each double-differential distribution are shown in table 5. The results show that no generator describes all distributions with a χ2probability larger than 1% . However, some interesting features stand out and were also observed in the earlier ATLAS results at √s= 13 TeV [6]: •All generators, except for the MadGraph5_aMC@NLO+Pythia 8.230 sample, predict a spectrum for the variables p` T,Ee+Eµand pe T+pµ Twhich is harder than in the data. Among the various combinations of matrix element and shower generators, Powheg+Pythia 8.230 gives the poorest agreement with these distributions, while MadGraph5_aMC@NLO+Pythia 8.230 provides acceptable matches to the measured normalised distributions, in particular for the Ee+Eµand pe T+pµ Tdifferential cross-sections. •The meµ distribution is well represented by MadGraph5_aMC@NLO+Herwig 7.1.3, while the peµ Tdistribution is better represented by Powheg+Pythia 8.230, especially the sample with the top-quark transverse momentum reweighted. •All generators fail to reproduce the |η`|distribution because of a 2% deficit for |η`|>1.5. The |yeµ|distribution is best represented by Powheg+Pythia 8.230 with the PDF4LHC15_nnlo_mc set, while other generators predict a surplus of events for |yeµ|>2.2, especially at high meµ. •All generators predict a different trend than seen in data for the distribution of |∆φeµ|. The data tend to be higher than the predictions at low |∆φeµ|, whereas they – 31 – JHEP07(2023)141 Generator p` T|η`|peµ Tpe T+pµ TEe+Eµmeµ |∆φeµ| |yeµ| Ndof 9 23 9 10 14 20 29 29 Powheg+Pythia 8 196 132 12.0 130 33 102 193 47 Powheg+Pythia 8 - top pTrew. 51 114 7.8 42 20.4 53 65 45.2 Powheg+Pythia 8 - hdamp ×2228 139 26 167 38 97 121 45.3 Powheg+Pythia 8 - PDF4LHC 186 100 11.5 125 32 93 185 33.6 Powheg+Pythia 8 - ISR up 149 111 17.3 120 34 79 66 50 Powheg+Pythia 8 - ISR down 216 159 10.6 131 30 113 311 44.5 Powheg+Pythia 8 - Rad up 164 115 27 139 38 78 49 47.6 Powheg+Pythia 8 - Rad down 216 159 10.6 131 30 113 311 44.5 Powheg+Pythia 8 - FSR up 216 132 12.5 143 35 106 194 46.8 Powheg+Pythia 8 - FSR down 171 139 9.5 118 30 98 185 49 Powheg+Pythia 8 - MEC off 42 136 41 37 16.5 83 181 42.7 aMC@NLO+Pythia816.5 126 48 14.4 14.3 89 300 50 aMC@NLO+Herwig 7.0.498 137 24 74 24.1 29.1 110 54 Powheg+Herwig 7.0.4 113 104 28 82 28 135 271 45.8 Powheg+Herwig 7.1.3 101 107 31 75 25.5 138 259 45.5 Table 4. χ2values for the comparison of the normalised measured differential cross-sections with different t¯ tsimulation samples. Ndof is the number of degrees of freedom. The χ2values are displayed to one decimal place if the corresponding χ2probability is greater than 1%, and rounded to integers otherwise. are generally lower in the high |∆φeµ|region. This trend was observed in various previous measurements [6,7,77]. 9 Conclusion The production of t¯ tpairs in pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV is measured using opposite-sign eµ events in association with one or two b-tagged jets in the LHC Run 2 (2015–2018) data collected by the ATLAS experiment with an integrated luminosity of 140 fb−1. The inclusive fiducial and total cross-sections for t¯ tproduction are measured. The total inclusive cross-section is measured to be σt¯ t= 829 ±1 (stat)±13 (syst)±8 (lumi)±2 (beam)pb, where the uncertainties are due to statistics, theoretical and experimental systematic effects, the integrated luminosity and the beam energy. This result is in excellent agreement with theoretical expectations. It is the most precise measurement of the inclusive t¯ tcrosssection to date. The t¯ tabsolute and normalised differential cross-sections are measured as functions of eight different variables (peµ T,pe T+pµ T,p` T,Ee+Eµ,meµ,|η`|,|∆φeµ|and |yeµ|). Furthermore, four double-differential cross-sections are measured as a function of |yeµ|in bins of meµ, and as a function of |∆φeµ|in bins of meµ,peµ Tand Ee+Eµ. These distributions are – 32 – JHEP07(2023)141 Generator |yeµ|:meµ |∆φeµ|:meµ |∆φeµ|:peµ T|∆φeµ|:Ee+Eµ Ndof 39 39 24 39 Powheg+Pythia 8 131 364 264 263 Powheg+Pythia 8 - top pTrew. 82 140 81 96 Powheg+Pythia 8 - hdamp ×2129 250 182 183 Powheg+Pythia 8 - PDF4LHC 114 351 252 253 Powheg+Pythia 8 - ISR up 108 153 105 112 Powheg+Pythia 8 - ISR down 143 562 413 409 Powheg+Pythia 8 - Rad up 109 130 90 104 Powheg+Pythia 8 - Rad down 143 562 413 409 Powheg+Pythia 8 - FSR up 137 374 271 268 Powheg+Pythia 8 - FSR down 122 349 247 255 Powheg+Pythia 8 - MEC off 107 276 219 237 aMC@NLO+Pythia8108 436 363 386 aMC@NLO+Herwig 7.0.495 270 154 162 Powheg+Herwig 7.0.4 151 400 334 345 Powheg+Herwig 7.1.3 147 392 318 336 Table 5. χ2values for the comparison of the normalised measured double-differential cross-sections with different t¯ tsimulation samples. Ndof is the number of degrees of freedom. The χ2values are displayed to one decimal place if the corresponding χ2probability is greater than 1%, and rounded to integers otherwise. confined to the fiducial region p` T>27 (25) GeV for the leading (sub-leading) lepton and |η`|<2.5for both leptons. The precision of the measurements is typically 2% for the absolute differential crosssections and at the 1% level for the normalised differential cross-sections, except in the highest energy bins where the t¯ t/Wt interference uncertainty contribution increases. The measurements are compared with a wide range of models for t¯ tproduction in pp collisions. No model can describe all measured distributions within their uncertainties. Acknowledgments 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; IN2P3CNRS and CEA-DRF/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 – 33 – JHEP07(2023)141 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 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 (U.K.) and BNL (U.S.A.), the Tier-2 facilities worldwide and large non-WLCG resource providers. Major contributors of computing resources are listed in ref. [78]. – 34 – JHEP07(2023)141 A Tables with detailed results p` Tbins dσ/dp` TData MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [GeV][fb/GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 25.0–30.0 461.6 0.38 0.11 0.48 1.09 0.11 0.71 0.93 1.72 30.0–40.0 433.1 0.27 0.08 0.56 0.87 0.11 0.67 0.93 1.57 40.0–50.0 357.0 0.30 0.07 0.66 0.74 0.11 0.66 0.92 1.54 50.0–60.0 277.2 0.33 0.07 0.53 0.74 0.12 0.68 0.92 1.51 60.0–75.0 197.2 0.29 0.07 0.59 0.74 0.13 0.67 0.92 1.52 75.0–100.0 109.2 0.30 0.07 0.69 0.82 0.15 0.85 0.93 1.69 100.0–140.0 41.79 0.40 0.09 0.65 0.96 0.17 1.25 0.94 2.00 140.0–180.0 12.85 0.69 0.17 0.71 1.42 0.20 2.22 0.97 2.99 180.0–250.0 3.16 1.02 0.28 1.04 1.86 0.26 4.25 1.01 4.98 250.0–350.0 0.51 2.35 0.66 2.54 4.24 0.41 12.97 1.15 14.15 Table 6. Absolute differential cross-section for p` T. |η`|bins dσ/d|η`|Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total - [pb/units of η] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.09 12.79 0.36 0.12 0.67 1.01 0.12 0.72 0.93 1.74 0.09–0.18 12.81 0.32 0.12 0.49 0.81 0.13 0.77 0.93 1.58 0.18–0.27 12.72 0.32 0.11 0.62 0.76 0.13 0.74 0.93 1.58 0.27–0.36 12.57 0.30 0.12 0.81 0.76 0.13 0.76 0.93 1.67 0.36–0.45 12.36 0.30 0.12 0.60 0.76 0.13 0.75 0.93 1.57 0.45–0.54 12.19 0.32 0.11 0.84 0.76 0.14 0.68 0.93 1.65 0.54–0.63 11.88 0.31 0.12 0.74 0.76 0.13 0.75 0.93 1.64 0.63–0.72 11.54 0.33 0.12 0.59 0.76 0.13 0.82 0.93 1.61 0.72–0.81 11.15 0.34 0.13 0.75 0.76 0.12 0.78 0.93 1.66 0.81–0.90 10.86 0.34 0.12 0.54 0.76 0.12 0.78 0.93 1.58 0.90–0.99 10.37 0.35 0.12 0.60 0.76 0.12 0.72 0.93 1.57 0.99–1.08 9.82 0.37 0.14 0.61 0.77 0.13 0.86 0.93 1.66 1.08–1.17 9.46 0.38 0.13 0.60 0.77 0.16 0.77 0.93 1.61 1.17–1.26 9.08 0.39 0.13 0.55 0.79 0.16 0.78 0.93 1.60 1.26–1.35 8.55 0.39 0.14 0.59 0.78 0.13 0.80 0.93 1.63 1.35–1.44 8.00 0.51 0.19 0.56 0.76 0.14 0.74 0.93 1.62 1.44–1.53 7.41 0.56 0.23 1.17 0.80 0.12 0.96 0.93 2.04 1.53–1.62 7.18 0.42 0.15 1.05 0.97 0.12 0.87 0.93 1.97 1.62–1.71 6.50 0.45 0.18 0.63 0.97 0.10 0.98 0.93 1.85 1.71–1.80 5.90 0.48 0.18 0.66 0.97 0.11 1.00 0.94 1.88 1.80–1.89 5.49 0.53 0.19 0.52 0.95 0.12 1.07 0.94 1.88 1.89–1.98 5.00 0.54 0.20 0.60 0.95 0.11 1.13 0.94 1.94 1.98–2.37 3.81 0.31 0.12 0.78 1.02 0.11 1.03 0.93 1.93 2.37–2.50 2.67 0.79 0.25 0.90 1.17 0.16 0.99 0.93 2.18 Table 7. Absolute differential cross-section for |η`|. – 35 – JHEP07(2023)141 Ee+Eµbins dσ/d(Ee+Eµ)Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [GeV][fb/GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 50.0–60.0 1.38 5.20 3.78 4.20 1.38 1.08 5.61 0.88 9.71 60.0–70.0 9.04 1.93 0.89 1.82 1.10 0.38 1.03 0.94 3.33 70.0–80.0 20.47 1.16 0.38 2.43 0.96 0.14 0.97 0.92 3.18 80.0–90.0 30.69 0.95 0.29 0.79 0.88 0.17 0.65 0.92 1.92 90.0–110.0 43.64 0.52 0.14 0.74 0.80 0.13 0.65 0.92 1.66 110.0–125.0 51.23 0.56 0.13 0.55 0.75 0.12 0.59 0.92 1.55 125.0–160.0 51.53 0.37 0.09 0.46 0.73 0.12 0.59 0.92 1.45 160.0–200.0 43.20 0.37 0.09 0.67 0.74 0.13 0.66 0.92 1.56 200.0–250.0 31.56 0.38 0.09 0.65 0.78 0.11 0.76 0.93 1.62 250.0–300.0 20.93 0.48 0.11 0.56 0.84 0.15 1.02 0.93 1.79 300.0–370.0 12.74 0.54 0.13 0.79 0.93 0.13 1.25 0.94 2.06 370.0–450.0 6.92 0.70 0.16 0.91 1.07 0.15 1.61 0.95 2.45 450.0–550.0 3.45 0.97 0.22 0.70 1.29 0.17 1.92 0.96 2.79 550.0–700.0 1.42 1.19 0.29 1.39 1.61 0.16 2.37 0.96 3.55 700.0–900.0 0.62 1.78 0.44 2.25 2.48 0.27 3.77 1.00 5.46 Table 8. Absolute differential cross-section for Ee+Eµ. meµ bins dσ/dmeµ Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [GeV][fb/GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.0–15.0 8.21 2.08 0.47 2.38 0.90 0.14 1.31 0.93 3.69 15.0–20.0 18.81 1.71 0.36 0.59 0.85 0.12 0.76 0.92 2.36 20.0–25.0 23.48 1.54 0.33 1.19 0.84 0.12 0.73 0.92 2.45 25.0–30.0 29.02 1.33 0.30 1.72 0.84 0.09 1.07 0.92 2.75 30.0–35.0 33.04 1.24 0.29 1.17 0.85 0.09 0.79 0.92 2.28 35.0–40.0 38.24 1.19 0.26 0.37 0.84 0.09 0.74 0.93 1.93 40.0–50.0 45.49 0.75 0.18 0.75 0.84 0.10 0.80 0.93 1.84 50.0–60.0 56.16 0.70 0.21 0.45 0.85 0.11 0.74 0.93 1.71 60.0–70.0 68.55 0.63 0.20 0.51 0.84 0.11 0.72 0.93 1.67 70.0–85.0 76.71 0.47 0.13 0.67 0.80 0.11 0.70 0.93 1.65 85.0–100.0 76.44 0.47 0.10 0.48 0.77 0.12 0.68 0.92 1.54 100.0–120.0 67.32 0.44 0.09 0.56 0.75 0.13 0.68 0.92 1.55 120.0–150.0 50.78 0.39 0.10 0.65 0.75 0.13 0.76 0.93 1.61 150.0–175.0 34.67 0.51 0.12 0.71 0.78 0.14 0.86 0.93 1.73 175.0–200.0 23.76 0.61 0.15 0.63 0.84 0.17 1.06 0.93 1.87 200.0–250.0 13.68 0.58 0.13 0.83 0.91 0.16 1.38 0.94 2.16 250.0–300.0 6.73 0.83 0.20 1.32 1.08 0.18 1.64 0.94 2.70 300.0–400.0 2.58 0.94 0.23 0.82 1.31 0.21 2.64 0.95 3.36 400.0–500.0 0.73 1.78 0.44 1.14 1.70 0.26 3.65 0.96 4.68 500.0–650.0 0.21 2.74 0.67 1.95 2.22 0.27 2.77 0.96 5.03 650.0–800.0 0.068 5.12 1.26 1.48 3.26 0.39 7.72 1.00 10.07 Table 9. Absolute differential cross-section for meµ. – 36 – JHEP07(2023)141 pe T+pµ Tbins dσ/d(pe T+pµ T)Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [GeV][fb/GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 50.0–60.0 25.03 1.25 0.49 2.10 1.36 0.19 0.74 0.93 3.09 60.0–70.0 72.26 0.66 0.22 0.70 1.05 0.16 0.85 0.93 1.92 70.0–80.0 102.4 0.52 0.14 0.70 0.88 0.14 0.65 0.92 1.69 80.0–100.0 114.9 0.33 0.08 0.59 0.79 0.11 0.65 0.92 1.53 100.0–125.0 96.23 0.33 0.07 0.55 0.74 0.12 0.63 0.92 1.49 125.0–150.0 62.80 0.39 0.09 0.66 0.76 0.13 0.74 0.93 1.61 150.0–200.0 29.54 0.41 0.10 0.79 0.87 0.16 1.11 0.94 1.92 200.0–250.0 10.14 0.65 0.17 0.92 1.19 0.20 2.18 0.96 2.91 250.0–300.0 3.90 1.09 0.26 1.09 1.52 0.22 2.97 0.98 3.82 300.0–400.0 1.14 1.43 0.36 2.37 2.06 0.26 4.45 1.00 5.73 400.0–600.0 0.14 2.84 0.82 2.70 3.73 0.44 11.87 1.11 13.13 Table 10. Absolute differential cross-section for pe T+pµ T. peµ Tbins dσ/dpeµ TData MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [GeV][fb/GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.0–20.0 32.51 0.66 0.21 0.87 0.79 0.19 0.67 0.92 1.79 20.0–30.0 69.08 0.64 0.17 0.87 0.78 0.22 0.68 0.92 1.78 30.0–45.0 87.41 0.46 0.11 0.90 0.78 0.18 0.66 0.92 1.72 45.0–60.0 111.0 0.41 0.09 0.71 0.79 0.15 0.64 0.92 1.61 60.0–75.0 121.0 0.38 0.09 0.66 0.79 0.14 0.63 0.92 1.57 75.0–100.0 93.20 0.33 0.07 0.70 0.78 0.12 0.66 0.92 1.59 100.0–125.0 48.51 0.45 0.10 0.97 0.89 0.15 0.99 0.93 1.96 125.0–150.0 19.74 0.70 0.17 0.38 1.20 0.21 1.98 0.95 2.64 150.0–200.0 5.73 0.95 0.23 0.55 1.62 0.28 3.65 1.00 4.28 200.0–300.0 0.86 1.78 0.49 3.39 2.64 0.35 11.88 1.14 12.82 Table 11. Absolute differential cross-section for peµ T. – 37 – JHEP07(2023)141 |∆φeµ|bins dσ/d|∆φeµ|Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [rad][pb/rad] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.10 2.21 1.12 0.24 0.46 0.84 0.11 0.84 0.92 1.95 0.10–0.21 2.19 1.12 0.24 0.73 0.84 0.10 0.83 0.92 2.03 0.21–0.31 2.18 1.05 0.24 1.26 0.84 0.10 0.79 0.92 2.22 0.31–0.42 2.22 1.08 0.23 0.33 0.85 0.08 1.02 0.93 1.99 0.42–0.52 2.23 1.03 0.23 0.93 0.84 0.10 0.78 0.92 2.04 0.52–0.63 2.31 1.02 0.22 1.19 0.84 0.09 0.77 0.92 2.16 0.63–0.73 2.32 1.00 0.22 0.70 0.84 0.12 0.89 0.92 1.98 0.73–0.84 2.40 0.95 0.22 1.11 0.83 0.10 0.72 0.92 2.06 0.84–0.94 2.43 1.01 0.23 1.22 0.83 0.10 0.93 0.93 2.23 0.94–1.05 2.48 0.98 0.22 0.65 0.83 0.11 0.83 0.93 1.92 1.05–1.15 2.60 0.98 0.23 0.88 0.83 0.11 0.75 0.93 1.98 1.15–1.26 2.73 0.93 0.21 0.59 0.82 0.09 0.80 0.93 1.86 1.26–1.36 2.83 0.91 0.20 0.95 0.82 0.10 0.90 0.93 2.03 1.36–1.47 2.99 0.90 0.20 0.37 0.81 0.13 0.78 0.93 1.77 1.47–1.57 3.07 0.90 0.21 0.47 0.81 0.11 0.87 0.93 1.83 1.57–1.68 3.18 0.88 0.20 0.57 0.81 0.12 1.03 0.93 1.93 1.68–1.78 3.35 0.86 0.21 0.57 0.80 0.12 0.78 0.93 1.79 1.78–1.88 3.46 0.85 0.21 0.62 0.80 0.14 1.00 0.93 1.92 1.88–1.99 3.65 0.80 0.21 0.62 0.80 0.13 0.90 0.93 1.85 1.99–2.09 3.83 0.81 0.20 0.86 0.79 0.13 0.82 0.93 1.91 2.09–2.20 4.00 0.75 0.19 1.21 0.79 0.14 0.76 0.93 2.04 2.20–2.30 4.19 0.75 0.20 1.10 0.79 0.17 0.78 0.93 1.98 2.30–2.41 4.31 0.74 0.19 0.60 0.80 0.16 0.72 0.93 1.73 2.41–2.51 4.49 0.73 0.18 0.79 0.80 0.17 0.81 0.93 1.84 2.51–2.62 4.59 0.71 0.19 0.67 0.81 0.16 0.87 0.93 1.82 2.62–2.72 4.71 0.72 0.19 0.60 0.81 0.18 0.82 0.93 1.77 2.72–2.83 4.79 0.70 0.18 0.94 0.82 0.19 0.86 0.94 1.93 2.83–2.93 4.87 0.71 0.19 0.86 0.82 0.20 0.86 0.93 1.90 2.93–3.04 4.95 0.68 0.18 1.03 0.83 0.18 0.75 0.93 1.93 3.04–3.14 5.09 0.66 0.17 0.70 0.83 0.19 0.76 0.93 1.77 Table 12. Absolute differential cross-section for |∆φeµ|. – 38 – JHEP07(2023)141 |yeµ|bins dσ/d|yeµ|Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total - [pb/units of y] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.08 7.94 0.59 0.15 0.58 0.77 0.13 0.75 0.92 1.65 0.08–0.17 7.96 0.57 0.14 0.70 0.78 0.13 0.75 0.92 1.69 0.17–0.25 7.89 0.61 0.15 0.43 0.77 0.13 0.69 0.93 1.59 0.25–0.33 7.78 0.56 0.14 0.51 0.78 0.14 0.82 0.93 1.65 0.33–0.42 7.64 0.60 0.14 0.65 0.77 0.12 0.80 0.93 1.71 0.42–0.50 7.47 0.61 0.15 0.81 0.77 0.12 0.89 0.93 1.82 0.50–0.58 7.21 0.64 0.15 0.73 0.77 0.14 0.79 0.93 1.75 0.58–0.67 6.98 0.65 0.15 1.03 0.77 0.13 0.75 0.93 1.88 0.67–0.75 6.70 0.65 0.16 0.85 0.78 0.14 0.79 0.93 1.81 0.75–0.83 6.42 0.66 0.16 0.53 0.78 0.13 0.90 0.93 1.74 0.83–0.92 5.99 0.68 0.17 0.59 0.79 0.14 0.88 0.93 1.77 0.92–1.00 5.73 0.69 0.17 0.68 0.80 0.14 0.73 0.93 1.74 1.00–1.08 5.40 0.76 0.18 0.77 0.81 0.13 0.86 0.93 1.86 1.08–1.17 4.97 0.80 0.20 0.95 0.82 0.13 0.87 0.93 1.98 1.17–1.25 4.55 0.86 0.20 0.94 0.84 0.13 0.89 0.93 2.01 1.25–1.33 4.12 0.89 0.24 0.84 0.86 0.16 0.80 0.93 1.96 1.33–1.42 3.75 1.02 0.24 0.97 0.88 0.11 0.85 0.93 2.10 1.42–1.50 3.34 1.05 0.27 0.74 0.91 0.11 0.91 0.94 2.06 1.50–1.58 2.97 1.15 0.29 0.79 0.95 0.13 0.91 0.94 2.16 1.58–1.67 2.53 1.27 0.36 1.31 1.01 0.14 1.02 0.94 2.53 1.67–1.75 2.13 1.43 0.38 1.40 1.05 0.14 1.29 0.95 2.80 1.75–1.83 1.76 1.58 0.44 1.42 1.11 0.14 1.28 0.95 2.92 1.83–1.92 1.50 1.81 0.43 2.12 1.17 0.12 1.17 0.95 3.41 1.92–2.00 1.14 2.04 0.57 1.26 1.23 0.10 1.29 0.96 3.19 2.00–2.08 0.88 2.54 0.73 1.60 1.30 0.15 1.56 0.96 3.82 2.08–2.17 0.67 2.87 0.76 1.40 1.39 0.32 2.35 0.98 4.39 2.17–2.25 0.44 3.71 1.00 4.70 1.41 0.18 1.71 0.98 6.54 2.25–2.33 0.24 4.63 1.61 2.40 1.50 0.24 2.26 0.99 6.18 2.33–2.42 0.13 7.91 2.26 3.54 1.53 0.29 2.74 1.00 9.55 2.42–2.50 0.045 26.27 3.68 7.40 1.89 0.77 6.60 0.92 28.41 Table 13. Absolute differential cross-section for |yeµ|. – 39 – JHEP07(2023)141 |yeµ|×meµ bins d2σ/d|yeµ|dmeµ Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total - [fb/GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.31 24.27 0.68 0.20 0.62 0.84 0.11 0.61 0.92 1.68 0.31–0.62 23.06 0.68 0.18 0.47 0.80 0.09 0.64 0.92 1.62 0.62–0.94 20.66 0.74 0.20 0.38 0.78 0.12 0.73 0.93 1.66 0.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 17.66 0.85 0.22 0.62 0.81 0.09 0.87 0.93 1.85 <70.0GeV 1.25–1.56 14.01 1.07 0.29 0.65 0.93 0.10 0.81 0.93 2.01 1.56–1.88 9.74 1.34 0.39 1.86 1.12 0.12 1.43 0.96 3.10 1.88–2.19 5.28 1.90 0.59 1.61 1.25 0.18 1.60 0.96 3.41 2.19–2.50 1.24 4.19 1.42 3.25 1.37 0.24 1.95 0.98 6.06 0.00–0.31 54.03 0.66 0.17 0.87 0.76 0.12 0.60 0.92 1.74 0.31–0.62 51.12 0.71 0.17 0.57 0.75 0.12 0.63 0.92 1.64 0.62–0.94 44.99 0.80 0.19 1.31 0.75 0.13 0.68 0.92 2.07 70.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 38.25 0.85 0.21 0.92 0.78 0.12 0.73 0.93 1.91 <100.0GeV 1.25–1.56 28.81 1.06 0.29 0.92 0.85 0.16 0.86 0.93 2.10 1.56–1.88 17.85 1.45 0.41 1.03 0.98 0.12 1.17 0.94 2.56 1.88–2.19 8.03 2.40 0.67 0.87 1.14 0.12 1.61 0.95 3.43 2.19–2.50 1.80 5.87 1.39 3.11 1.28 0.67 2.56 0.99 7.46 0.00–0.31 47.10 0.70 0.16 0.46 0.72 0.14 0.66 0.92 1.60 0.31–0.62 44.75 0.74 0.16 0.69 0.72 0.13 0.67 0.92 1.70 0.62–0.94 39.40 0.83 0.18 0.76 0.73 0.13 0.70 0.92 1.78 100.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 32.73 0.92 0.22 0.68 0.76 0.13 0.87 0.93 1.89 <130.0GeV 1.25–1.56 22.66 1.16 0.26 1.15 0.81 0.11 0.80 0.93 2.22 1.56–1.88 12.52 1.71 0.40 1.32 0.96 0.13 1.08 0.94 2.80 1.88–2.19 5.25 2.92 0.67 1.77 1.27 0.17 1.52 0.96 4.12 2.19–2.50 0.99 7.55 1.93 4.29 1.51 0.37 2.67 0.94 9.47 0.00–0.31 27.05 0.62 0.14 0.62 0.73 0.15 0.72 0.92 1.65 0.31–0.62 25.49 0.63 0.15 0.91 0.74 0.14 0.79 0.93 1.82 0.62–0.94 22.06 0.71 0.16 0.84 0.77 0.15 0.90 0.93 1.87 130.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 16.67 0.84 0.19 1.19 0.82 0.16 0.98 0.93 2.16 <200.0GeV 1.25–1.56 10.61 1.10 0.26 1.75 0.88 0.17 0.96 0.93 2.64 1.56–1.88 5.60 1.68 0.39 2.05 1.16 0.17 1.10 0.94 3.26 1.88–2.19 2.02 3.28 0.77 2.48 1.69 0.12 1.41 0.97 4.82 2.19–2.50 0.33 9.44 2.36 9.34 2.27 0.27 2.97 0.98 14.03 0.00–0.31 2.15 0.76 0.17 1.01 0.98 0.18 1.81 0.94 2.61 0.31–0.62 1.91 0.79 0.19 1.20 1.03 0.18 1.96 0.94 2.82 0.62–0.94 1.50 0.88 0.21 0.53 1.10 0.17 1.93 0.94 2.63 200.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 1.00 1.16 0.27 1.65 1.23 0.20 1.94 0.95 3.22 <800.0+ GeV 1.25–1.56 0.56 1.71 0.37 2.67 1.48 0.21 1.63 0.95 4.00 1.56–1.88 0.22 2.74 0.76 3.05 1.92 0.24 2.23 0.97 5.19 1.88–2.19 0.078 6.53 1.56 5.63 2.67 0.34 1.85 1.00 9.40 2.19–2.50 0.007 20.92 7.43 23.77 3.91 1.32 3.80 1.00 33.02 Table 14. Double-differential cross-section for |yeµ|:meµ. The cross-section measured in the last region includes events with an invariant mass greater than 800 GeV. – 40 – JHEP07(2023)141 |∆φeµ|bins 1/σ dσ/d|∆φeµ|Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [rad]×10−2[1/rad] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.10 20.94 1.11 0.24 0.61 0.14 0.13 0.15 0.01 1.31 0.10–0.21 20.81 1.11 0.24 0.59 0.13 0.11 0.26 0.01 1.32 0.21–0.31 20.72 1.04 0.24 1.39 0.13 0.12 0.32 0.01 1.79 0.31–0.42 21.04 1.07 0.22 0.25 0.14 0.10 0.35 0.01 1.19 0.42–0.52 21.20 1.02 0.22 0.90 0.13 0.08 0.12 0.01 1.39 0.52–0.63 21.87 1.01 0.22 1.19 0.12 0.09 0.22 0.01 1.60 0.63–0.73 22.04 0.99 0.22 0.62 0.12 0.10 0.29 0.01 1.24 0.73–0.84 22.76 0.93 0.22 1.26 0.11 0.08 0.32 0.01 1.62 0.84–0.94 23.06 1.00 0.23 1.22 0.11 0.08 0.20 0.00 1.61 0.94–1.05 23.57 0.97 0.22 0.47 0.10 0.06 0.07 0.01 1.11 1.05–1.15 24.66 0.96 0.22 0.82 0.11 0.07 0.24 0.01 1.31 1.15–1.26 25.94 0.92 0.21 0.49 0.09 0.06 0.15 0.01 1.08 1.26–1.36 26.87 0.89 0.20 0.84 0.08 0.07 0.20 0.00 1.26 1.36–1.47 28.40 0.89 0.20 0.42 0.07 0.09 0.14 0.00 1.02 1.47–1.57 29.15 0.88 0.20 0.31 0.06 0.04 0.16 0.00 0.97 1.57–1.68 30.17 0.86 0.20 0.45 0.06 0.03 0.37 0.00 1.06 1.68–1.78 31.77 0.85 0.20 0.32 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.00 0.93 1.78–1.88 32.83 0.83 0.21 0.35 0.03 0.07 0.35 0.00 0.99 1.88–1.99 34.62 0.79 0.20 0.50 0.02 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.97 1.99–2.09 36.31 0.79 0.20 0.51 0.03 0.03 0.10 0.00 0.97 2.09–2.20 37.97 0.74 0.18 0.89 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.00 1.18 2.20–2.30 39.74 0.73 0.20 0.84 0.05 0.06 0.20 0.00 1.15 2.30–2.41 40.84 0.71 0.18 0.21 0.06 0.06 0.38 0.00 0.86 2.41–2.51 42.60 0.71 0.18 0.45 0.08 0.06 0.12 0.00 0.87 2.51–2.62 43.50 0.69 0.19 0.47 0.09 0.08 0.13 0.01 0.87 2.62–2.72 44.70 0.69 0.19 0.47 0.10 0.08 0.14 0.01 0.88 2.72–2.83 45.46 0.68 0.17 0.84 0.12 0.09 0.08 0.01 1.11 2.83–2.93 46.22 0.69 0.18 0.53 0.13 0.09 0.15 0.01 0.92 2.93–3.04 46.94 0.67 0.18 0.64 0.14 0.08 0.19 0.01 0.98 3.04–3.14 48.24 0.65 0.16 0.49 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.01 0.86 Table 24. Normalised differential cross-section for |∆φeµ|. – 47 – JHEP07(2023)141 |yeµ|bins 1/σ dσ/d|yeµ|Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total -×10−3[1/units of y] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.08 754.8 0.56 0.14 0.27 0.15 0.02 0.18 0.02 0.68 0.08–0.17 756.2 0.55 0.14 0.33 0.15 0.03 0.18 0.02 0.69 0.17–0.25 749.7 0.60 0.14 0.39 0.14 0.02 0.18 0.02 0.76 0.25–0.33 739.6 0.55 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.03 0.26 0.02 0.65 0.33–0.42 726.2 0.59 0.14 0.57 0.13 0.02 0.20 0.02 0.86 0.42–0.50 710.1 0.59 0.14 0.65 0.12 0.03 0.25 0.01 0.93 0.50–0.58 685.2 0.62 0.14 0.53 0.12 0.03 0.20 0.01 0.86 0.58–0.67 663.1 0.64 0.15 0.81 0.11 0.02 0.14 0.01 1.05 0.67–0.75 636.3 0.64 0.16 0.53 0.09 0.02 0.10 0.01 0.86 0.75–0.83 610.2 0.64 0.16 0.33 0.08 0.03 0.23 0.00 0.78 0.83–0.92 569.5 0.67 0.17 0.25 0.07 0.03 0.19 0.00 0.76 0.92–1.00 544.1 0.68 0.16 0.44 0.08 0.04 0.23 0.00 0.86 1.00–1.08 512.9 0.74 0.17 0.56 0.06 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.96 1.08–1.17 472.0 0.79 0.19 0.97 0.08 0.02 0.11 0.01 1.27 1.17–1.25 432.5 0.84 0.20 0.79 0.10 0.05 0.13 0.01 1.18 1.25–1.33 391.0 0.87 0.23 0.65 0.13 0.06 0.11 0.02 1.13 1.33–1.42 356.0 1.00 0.23 0.88 0.17 0.04 0.35 0.02 1.40 1.42–1.50 317.8 1.04 0.26 0.28 0.21 0.07 0.25 0.02 1.16 1.50–1.58 282.1 1.13 0.28 0.61 0.29 0.14 0.35 0.03 1.40 1.58–1.67 240.7 1.25 0.35 1.09 0.36 0.08 0.45 0.03 1.80 1.67–1.75 202.4 1.41 0.37 1.07 0.43 0.06 0.65 0.05 1.98 1.75–1.83 167.1 1.57 0.43 1.21 0.51 0.10 0.85 0.05 2.26 1.83–1.92 142.7 1.79 0.42 1.86 0.59 0.09 0.74 0.05 2.79 1.92–2.00 108.4 2.03 0.56 1.21 0.67 0.10 0.84 0.07 2.66 2.00–2.08 84.03 2.52 0.72 1.44 0.75 0.11 1.31 0.07 3.35 2.08–2.17 63.59 2.86 0.75 1.34 0.86 0.28 1.99 0.09 3.91 2.17–2.25 41.88 3.69 1.00 4.41 0.88 0.19 1.42 0.10 6.07 2.25–2.33 23.18 4.63 1.60 2.39 0.96 0.24 1.94 0.12 5.87 2.33–2.42 12.40 7.90 2.25 3.77 1.01 0.35 2.42 0.15 9.42 2.42–2.50 4.27 26.26 3.66 7.43 1.45 0.69 6.67 0.11 28.37 Table 25. Normalised differential cross-section for |yeµ|. – 48 – JHEP07(2023)141 |yeµ |×meµ bins 1/σ d2σ/d|yeµ |dmeµ Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total -×10−3[1/GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.31 2.30 0.66 0.19 0.48 0.22 0.08 0.57 0.03 1.04 0.31–0.62 2.19 0.66 0.17 0.27 0.21 0.07 0.52 0.03 0.93 0.62–0.94 1.96 0.73 0.20 0.30 0.21 0.06 0.54 0.02 1.00 0.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 1.67 0.82 0.21 0.58 0.19 0.08 0.79 0.01 1.31 <70.0GeV 1.25–1.56 1.33 1.05 0.29 0.36 0.29 0.07 0.54 0.01 1.31 1.56–1.88 0.92 1.33 0.38 1.72 0.55 0.09 1.04 0.04 2.50 1.88–2.19 0.50 1.89 0.58 1.61 0.72 0.16 1.26 0.06 2.94 2.19–2.50 0.12 4.18 1.41 3.10 0.84 0.26 1.38 0.10 5.63 0.00–0.31 5.12 0.65 0.17 0.72 0.21 0.04 0.33 0.03 1.06 0.31–0.62 4.84 0.70 0.17 0.44 0.21 0.03 0.26 0.02 0.91 0.62–0.94 4.26 0.78 0.18 1.19 0.19 0.02 0.44 0.02 1.52 70.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 3.63 0.84 0.20 0.88 0.18 0.03 0.44 0.01 1.32 <100.0GeV 1.25–1.56 2.73 1.05 0.29 0.92 0.22 0.17 0.47 0.01 1.53 1.56–1.88 1.69 1.44 0.41 0.68 0.37 0.09 0.71 0.03 1.83 1.88–2.19 0.76 2.38 0.67 0.57 0.60 0.11 1.29 0.06 2.91 2.19–2.50 0.17 5.86 1.39 2.83 0.73 0.69 2.29 0.10 7.11 0.00–0.31 4.46 0.69 0.16 0.32 0.21 0.04 0.26 0.03 0.84 0.31–0.62 4.24 0.72 0.16 0.55 0.21 0.03 0.20 0.02 0.97 0.62–0.94 3.73 0.82 0.18 0.58 0.16 0.03 0.14 0.01 1.04 100.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 3.10 0.91 0.22 0.50 0.14 0.02 0.18 0.00 1.08 <130.0GeV 1.25–1.56 2.15 1.14 0.26 0.89 0.15 0.07 0.38 0.02 1.53 1.56–1.88 1.19 1.71 0.40 1.01 0.35 0.07 0.62 0.04 2.14 1.88–2.19 0.50 2.90 0.66 1.81 0.73 0.10 1.13 0.08 3.74 2.19–2.50 0.09 7.54 1.92 4.18 1.02 0.37 2.77 0.12 9.32 0.00–0.31 2.56 0.60 0.13 0.52 0.21 0.04 0.19 0.01 0.85 0.31–0.62 2.42 0.62 0.14 0.78 0.18 0.03 0.20 0.01 1.05 0.62–0.94 2.09 0.69 0.16 0.50 0.14 0.04 0.29 0.00 0.93 130.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 1.58 0.83 0.19 1.07 0.16 0.06 0.34 0.01 1.42 <200.0GeV 1.25–1.56 1.01 1.10 0.25 1.70 0.22 0.07 0.22 0.03 2.07 1.56–1.88 0.53 1.66 0.38 1.96 0.62 0.10 0.38 0.06 2.70 1.88–2.19 0.19 3.26 0.76 2.20 1.23 0.08 0.71 0.10 4.25 2.19–2.50 0.038 9.42 2.36 9.26 1.84 0.25 2.92 0.18 13.86 0.00–0.31 0.20 0.75 0.17 0.83 0.42 0.08 1.32 0.02 1.79 0.31–0.62 0.18 0.77 0.18 1.12 0.47 0.08 1.47 0.02 2.07 0.62–0.94 0.14 0.87 0.21 0.31 0.54 0.07 1.43 0.03 1.80 200.0≤meµ 0.94–1.25 0.10 1.14 0.27 1.60 0.70 0.09 1.41 0.04 2.54 <800.0+ GeV 1.25–1.56 0.056 1.70 0.37 2.57 1.01 0.12 1.03 0.06 3.43 1.56–1.88 0.024 2.73 0.76 2.92 1.49 0.17 1.62 0.11 4.63 1.88–2.19 0.0063 6.52 1.56 5.43 2.29 0.30 1.36 0.18 9.04 2.19–2.50 0.00070 20.92 7.42 23.90 3.57 1.30 3.72 0.27 33.05 Table 26. Normalised double-differential cross-section for |yeµ|:meµ. The cross-section measured in the last region includes events with an invariant mass greater than 800 GeV. – 49 – JHEP07(2023)141 |∆φeµ |×meµ bins 1/σ d2σ/d|∆φeµ |dmeµ Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [rad]×10−3[1/rad GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.39 2.06 0.66 0.15 1.02 0.12 0.10 0.40 0.01 1.30 0.39–0.79 2.02 0.64 0.14 0.54 0.12 0.08 0.47 0.01 0.98 0.79–1.18 1.80 0.69 0.16 0.66 0.15 0.05 0.61 0.01 1.16 0.0≤meµ 1.18–1.57 1.31 0.81 0.20 0.63 0.28 0.05 0.68 0.01 1.28 <70.0GeV 1.57–1.96 0.75 1.12 0.39 0.50 0.33 0.09 0.63 0.01 1.47 1.96–2.36 0.39 1.72 0.81 1.24 0.47 0.27 0.96 0.03 2.53 2.36–2.75 0.24 2.32 1.30 2.54 0.50 0.38 1.47 0.03 4.01 2.75–3.14 0.16 2.59 1.75 1.35 0.69 0.45 1.82 0.06 3.95 0.00–0.39 0.91 1.50 0.33 0.59 0.16 0.11 0.66 0.01 1.79 0.39–0.79 1.14 1.26 0.29 0.74 0.14 0.08 0.21 0.01 1.51 0.79–1.18 1.78 1.05 0.24 1.08 0.15 0.13 0.20 0.01 1.55 70.0≤meµ 1.18–1.57 2.92 0.82 0.18 0.78 0.10 0.07 0.17 0.01 1.17 <100.0GeV 1.57–1.96 3.44 0.79 0.18 0.67 0.22 0.04 0.31 0.01 1.12 1.96–2.36 3.20 0.79 0.21 0.82 0.28 0.06 0.77 0.01 1.42 2.36–2.75 2.68 0.87 0.26 0.59 0.32 0.11 0.77 0.01 1.37 2.75–3.14 2.38 0.97 0.29 1.14 0.31 0.23 0.68 0.01 1.72 0.00–0.39 0.51 1.97 0.43 2.34 0.24 0.20 0.67 0.01 3.17 0.39–0.79 0.62 1.73 0.37 1.71 0.28 0.11 0.45 0.01 2.52 0.79–1.18 0.88 1.41 0.32 1.40 0.24 0.11 0.76 0.01 2.17 100.0≤meµ 1.18–1.57 1.52 1.08 0.24 0.54 0.19 0.13 0.46 0.00 1.33 <130.0GeV 1.57–1.96 2.46 0.86 0.20 0.50 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.00 1.03 1.96–2.36 3.13 0.78 0.18 0.93 0.21 0.04 0.24 0.01 1.27 2.36–2.75 3.20 0.79 0.17 0.74 0.24 0.08 0.54 0.01 1.25 2.75–3.14 3.16 0.80 0.18 0.30 0.29 0.06 0.36 0.01 0.99 0.00–0.39 0.22 1.99 0.41 3.94 0.35 0.19 0.76 0.03 4.51 0.39–0.79 0.25 1.88 0.40 2.86 0.31 0.13 1.14 0.02 3.64 0.79–1.18 0.32 1.56 0.34 1.47 0.27 0.12 0.93 0.01 2.38 130.0≤meµ 1.18–1.57 0.54 1.24 0.27 1.04 0.34 0.13 0.68 0.01 1.82 <200.0GeV 1.57–1.96 0.97 0.89 0.20 0.84 0.27 0.09 0.71 0.01 1.46 1.96–2.36 1.61 0.70 0.16 0.58 0.15 0.05 0.11 0.01 0.94 2.36–2.75 2.11 0.61 0.14 0.60 0.17 0.06 0.13 0.00 0.90 2.75–3.14 2.26 0.60 0.14 0.39 0.20 0.08 0.24 0.00 0.79 0.00–0.39 0.0089 3.43 0.71 3.20 0.58 0.19 2.30 0.04 5.31 0.39–0.79 0.010 3.05 0.66 2.58 0.57 0.19 3.12 0.04 5.15 0.79–1.18 0.014 2.57 0.58 2.22 0.65 0.13 2.44 0.03 4.28 200.0≤meµ 1.18–1.57 0.022 2.13 0.47 1.80 0.53 0.20 2.44 0.03 3.77 <800.0+ GeV 1.57–1.96 0.040 1.55 0.35 0.95 0.61 0.16 2.55 0.04 3.22 1.96–2.36 0.085 1.07 0.23 0.89 0.60 0.12 1.81 0.03 2.38 2.36–2.75 0.16 0.73 0.19 0.37 0.54 0.08 1.17 0.03 1.54 2.75–3.14 0.22 0.65 0.15 0.61 0.53 0.13 0.87 0.03 1.37 Table 27. Normalised double-differential cross-section for |∆φeµ|:meµ. The cross-section measured in the last region includes events with an invariant mass greater than 800 GeV. – 50 – JHEP07(2023)141 |∆φeµ |×peµ Tbins 1/σ d2σ/d|∆φeµ |dpeµ TData MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [rad]×10−3[1/rad GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–1.65 0.0070 8.68 3.10 8.35 1.61 0.27 5.85 0.02 13.84 0.0≤peµ T1.65–2.02 0.46 2.10 0.79 2.35 0.58 0.17 1.36 0.01 3.57 <40.0GeV 2.02–2.40 1.76 1.02 0.36 1.18 0.33 0.12 0.76 0.01 1.81 2.40–2.77 4.43 0.60 0.17 0.28 0.32 0.12 0.48 0.01 0.90 2.77–3.14 7.16 0.46 0.12 0.36 0.28 0.14 0.40 0.01 0.78 0.00–0.31 0.75 2.37 0.52 2.16 0.66 0.24 0.97 0.02 3.46 0.31–0.63 0.96 1.99 0.42 1.09 0.56 0.13 1.05 0.03 2.60 0.63–0.94 1.29 1.70 0.38 0.53 0.50 0.07 1.29 0.02 2.28 0.94–1.26 1.94 1.34 0.31 1.23 0.40 0.08 0.73 0.02 2.02 40.0≤peµ T1.26–1.57 3.07 1.07 0.25 1.02 0.32 0.08 0.58 0.01 1.64 <65.0GeV 1.57–1.88 4.41 0.86 0.22 0.80 0.28 0.05 0.32 0.01 1.27 1.88–2.20 5.72 0.70 0.18 0.78 0.33 0.06 0.63 0.01 1.28 2.20–2.51 6.23 0.68 0.15 0.27 0.34 0.08 0.68 0.01 1.07 2.51–2.83 5.24 0.74 0.17 0.93 0.24 0.09 0.16 0.01 1.24 2.83–3.14 3.69 0.88 0.21 0.91 0.22 0.11 0.21 0.01 1.32 0.00–0.31 5.40 0.63 0.14 0.64 0.14 0.12 0.17 0.01 0.94 0.31–0.63 5.42 0.62 0.13 0.28 0.14 0.09 0.16 0.01 0.73 0.63–0.94 5.54 0.58 0.13 0.86 0.13 0.10 0.21 0.00 1.08 0.94–1.26 5.68 0.58 0.13 0.86 0.13 0.08 0.09 0.00 1.06 65.0≤peµ T1.26–1.57 5.83 0.58 0.13 0.57 0.12 0.10 0.31 0.00 0.89 <100.0+ GeV 1.57–1.88 5.59 0.60 0.13 0.47 0.15 0.08 0.53 0.01 0.95 1.88–2.20 5.14 0.61 0.14 0.51 0.26 0.08 0.64 0.01 1.07 2.20–2.51 4.25 0.69 0.16 0.52 0.45 0.10 0.85 0.02 1.30 2.51–2.83 3.09 0.78 0.20 0.20 0.68 0.08 1.13 0.04 1.56 2.83–3.14 2.44 0.94 0.23 0.90 0.80 0.17 1.55 0.04 2.20 Table 28. Normalised double-differential cross-section for |∆φeµ|:peµ T. The cross-section measured in the last region includes events with a pTgreater than 100 GeV. – 51 – JHEP07(2023)141 |∆φeµ |×(Ee+Eµ)bins 1/σ d2σ/d|∆φeµ |d(Ee+Eµ)Data MC t¯ tLep. Jets/ Bkg. Lumi + Total [rad]×10−3[1/rad GeV] stat. [%] stat. [%] mod. [%] [%] b-tag. [%] [%] Ebeam [%] unc. [%] 0.00–0.39 0.41 1.19 0.27 0.72 0.30 0.11 0.78 0.04 1.65 0.39–0.79 0.42 1.12 0.24 1.68 0.30 0.08 0.83 0.03 2.22 0.79–1.18 0.42 1.07 0.26 0.49 0.30 0.10 0.94 0.03 1.56 0.0≤Ee+Eµ1.18–1.57 0.42 1.11 0.27 0.40 0.33 0.07 0.62 0.03 1.40 <110.0GeV 1.57–1.96 0.42 1.11 0.31 0.76 0.34 0.07 0.67 0.03 1.57 1.96–2.36 0.40 1.15 0.44 1.23 0.35 0.19 0.53 0.03 1.86 2.36–2.75 0.40 1.20 0.44 0.94 0.35 0.18 1.01 0.02 1.92 2.75–3.14 0.38 1.23 0.50 1.38 0.35 0.16 0.76 0.02 2.10 0.00–0.39 1.30 1.28 0.27 1.49 0.20 0.11 0.28 0.03 2.01 0.39–0.79 1.37 1.15 0.26 0.68 0.20 0.06 0.83 0.03 1.61 0.79–1.18 1.48 1.13 0.24 0.51 0.22 0.05 0.48 0.02 1.37 110.0≤Ee+Eµ1.18–1.57 1.61 1.08 0.24 1.03 0.23 0.02 0.58 0.03 1.63 <140.0GeV 1.57–1.96 1.65 1.04 0.27 0.75 0.28 0.06 0.23 0.02 1.36 1.96–2.36 1.75 1.02 0.25 0.88 0.30 0.06 0.85 0.02 1.64 2.36–2.75 1.70 1.07 0.26 0.64 0.32 0.08 0.81 0.02 1.54 2.75–3.14 1.71 1.03 0.26 0.49 0.36 0.06 0.57 0.03 1.36 0.00–0.39 0.94 1.05 0.23 1.01 0.17 0.12 0.21 0.01 1.50 0.39–0.79 1.00 0.96 0.21 0.55 0.15 0.09 0.25 0.01 1.16 0.79–1.18 1.08 0.92 0.21 0.93 0.16 0.11 0.17 0.01 1.35 140.0≤Ee+Eµ1.18–1.57 1.29 0.86 0.19 1.21 0.15 0.06 0.28 0.01 1.53 <200.0GeV 1.57–1.96 1.48 0.78 0.19 0.86 0.18 0.04 0.13 0.01 1.20 1.96–2.36 1.68 0.75 0.18 0.48 0.25 0.04 0.34 0.02 1.00 2.36–2.75 1.78 0.72 0.18 1.06 0.28 0.10 0.34 0.01 1.37 2.75–3.14 1.78 0.72 0.18 0.71 0.30 0.08 0.43 0.01 1.15 0.00–0.39 0.55 1.57 0.33 1.04 0.24 0.18 0.29 0.01 1.96 0.39–0.79 0.57 1.46 0.33 2.19 0.24 0.11 0.27 0.01 2.68 0.79–1.18 0.65 1.32 0.31 0.80 0.20 0.10 0.38 0.01 1.63 200.0≤Ee+Eµ1.18–1.57 0.81 1.20 0.26 0.85 0.15 0.12 0.33 0.00 1.54 <250.0GeV 1.57–1.96 0.97 1.11 0.25 1.21 0.14 0.05 0.18 0.00 1.67 1.96–2.36 1.20 0.94 0.23 1.29 0.15 0.02 0.21 0.00 1.63 2.36–2.75 1.39 0.92 0.21 0.32 0.24 0.05 0.31 0.00 1.07 2.75–3.14 1.48 0.87 0.21 0.51 0.25 0.17 0.23 0.00 1.10 0.00–0.39 0.059 1.32 0.30 1.71 0.50 0.19 1.17 0.04 2.53 0.39–0.79 0.064 1.22 0.29 1.68 0.51 0.16 1.54 0.04 2.66 0.79–1.18 0.077 1.16 0.26 1.15 0.47 0.11 1.11 0.04 2.05 250.0≤Ee+Eµ1.18–1.57 0.10 1.07 0.24 0.69 0.47 0.15 1.11 0.04 1.78 <900.0+ GeV 1.57–1.96 0.13 0.84 0.20 0.80 0.45 0.11 1.14 0.04 1.70 1.96–2.36 0.19 0.73 0.16 0.58 0.38 0.07 0.79 0.04 1.29 2.36–2.75 0.25 0.57 0.15 0.49 0.38 0.06 0.76 0.04 1.15 2.75–3.14 0.30 0.56 0.13 0.58 0.40 0.12 0.55 0.04 1.07 Table 29. Normalised double-differential cross-section for |∆φeµ|:Ee+Eµ. The cross-section measured in the last region includes events with a sum of the two energies greater than 900 GeV. Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. References [1] ATLAS collaboration, The ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider,2008 JINST 3S08003 [INSPIRE]. [2] ATLAS IBL collaboration, Production and integration of the ATLAS Insertable B-Layer, 2018 JINST 13 T05008 [arXiv:1803.00844] [INSPIRE]. [3] ATLAS collaboration, ATLAS Insertable B-Layer: technical design report,ATLAS-TDR-19, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2010). [4] ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of the t¯ tproduction cross-section using eµ events with b-tagged jets in pp collisions at √s= 7 and 8TeV with the ATLAS detector,Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 3109 [Addendum ibid. 76 (2016) 642] [arXiv:1406.5375] [INSPIRE]. – 52 – JHEP07(2023)141 [5] ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of lepton differential distributions and the top quark mass in t¯ tproduction in pp collisions at √s= 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017) 804 [arXiv:1709.09407] [INSPIRE]. [6] ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of the t¯ tproduction cross-section and lepton differential distributions in eµ dilepton events from pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 528 [arXiv:1910.08819] [INSPIRE]. [7] CMS collaboration, Measurements of t¯ tdifferential cross sections in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV using events containing two leptons,JHEP 02 (2019) 149 [arXiv:1811.06625] [INSPIRE]. [8] CMS collaboration, Measurement of t¯ tnormalised multi-differential cross sections in pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV, and simultaneous determination of the strong coupling strength, top quark pole mass, and parton distribution functions,Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 658 [arXiv:1904.05237] [INSPIRE]. [9] CMS collaboration, Measurement of the top quark Yukawa coupling from t¯ tkinematic distributions in the dilepton final state in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV,Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 092013 [arXiv:2009.07123] [INSPIRE]. [10] ATLAS collaboration, Luminosity determination in pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC,arXiv:2212.09379 [INSPIRE]. [11] ATLAS collaboration, The ATLAS collaboration software and firmware, ATL-SOFT-PUB-2021-001, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2021). [12] ATLAS collaboration, Performance of the ATLAS trigger system in 2015,Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 317 [arXiv:1611.09661] [INSPIRE]. [13] ATLAS collaboration, Performance of the ATLAS muon triggers in run 2,2020 JINST 15 P09015 [arXiv:2004.13447] [INSPIRE]. [14] ATLAS collaboration, Performance of electron and photon triggers in ATLAS during LHC run 2,Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 47 [arXiv:1909.00761] [INSPIRE]. [15] ATLAS collaboration, ATLAS data quality operations and performance for 2015–2018 data-taking,2020 JINST 15 P04003 [arXiv:1911.04632] [INSPIRE]. [16] ATLAS collaboration, The ATLAS simulation infrastructure,Eur. Phys. J. C 70 (2010) 823 [arXiv:1005.4568] [INSPIRE]. [17] GEANT4 collaboration, GEANT4— a simulation toolkit,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506 (2003) 250 [INSPIRE]. [18] C. ATLAS et al., The simulation principle and performance of the ATLAS fast calorimeter simulation FastCaloSim,ATL-PHYS-PUB-2010-013, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2010). [19] T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna and P.Z. Skands, A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1,Comput. Phys. Commun. 178 (2008) 852 [arXiv:0710.3820] [INSPIRE]. [20] R.D. Ball et al., Parton distributions with LHC data,Nucl. Phys. B 867 (2013) 244 [arXiv:1207.1303] [INSPIRE]. [21] ATLAS collaboration, The Pythia 8A3tune description of ATLAS minimum bias and inelastic measurements incorporating the Donnachie-Landshoff diffractive model, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-017, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2016). – 53 – JHEP07(2023)141 [22] D.J. Lange, The EvtGen particle decay simulation package,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 462 (2001) 152 [INSPIRE]. [23] P. Nason, A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP 11 (2004) 040 [hep-ph/0409146] [INSPIRE]. [24] S. Frixione, P. Nason and C. Oleari, Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method,JHEP 11 (2007) 070 [arXiv:0709.2092] [INSPIRE]. [25] S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari and E. Re, A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX,JHEP 06 (2010) 043 [arXiv:1002.2581] [INSPIRE]. [26] S. Frixione, P. Nason and G. Ridolfi, A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction,JHEP 09 (2007) 126 [arXiv:0707.3088] [INSPIRE]. [27] NNPDF collaboration, Parton distributions for the LHC run II,JHEP 04 (2015) 040 [arXiv:1410.8849] [INSPIRE]. [28] T. Sjöstrand et al., An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2,Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159 [arXiv:1410.3012] [INSPIRE]. [29] T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna and P.Z. Skands, PYTHIA 6.4physics and manual,JHEP 05 (2006) 026 [hep-ph/0603175] [INSPIRE]. [30] ATLAS collaboration, ATLAS Pythia 8tunes to 7TeV data,ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-021, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2014). [31] ATLAS collaboration, Studies on top-quark Monte Carlo modelling for Top2016, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-020, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2016). [32] ATLAS collaboration, Improvements in t¯ tmodelling using NLO+PS Monte Carlo generators for run 2,ATL-PHYS-PUB-2018-009, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2018). [33] J. Butterworth et al., PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC run II,J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 023001 [arXiv:1510.03865] [INSPIRE]. [34] J. Gao and P. Nadolsky, A meta-analysis of parton distribution functions,JHEP 07 (2014) 035 [arXiv:1401.0013] [INSPIRE]. [35] S. Carrazza et al., An unbiased Hessian representation for Monte Carlo PDFs,Eur. Phys. J. C75 (2015) 369 [arXiv:1505.06736] [INSPIRE]. [36] J. Alwall et al., The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations,JHEP 07 (2014) 079 [arXiv:1405.0301] [INSPIRE]. [37] ATLAS collaboration, Study of top-quark pair modelling and uncertainties using ATLAS measurements at √s= 13 TeV,ATL-PHYS-PUB-2020-023, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2020). [38] M. Bähr et al., Herwig++ physics and manual,Eur. Phys. J. C 58 (2008) 639 [arXiv:0803.0883] [INSPIRE]. [39] J. Bellm et al., Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0release note,Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 196 [arXiv:1512.01178] [INSPIRE]. [40] S. Gieseke, C. Röhr and A. Siódmok, Colour reconnections in Herwig++,Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 2225 [arXiv:1206.0041] [INSPIRE]. – 54 – JHEP07(2023)141 [41] J. Bellm et al., Herwig 7.1release note,arXiv:1705.06919 [INSPIRE]. [42] S. Carrazza, J.I. Latorre, J. Rojo and G. Watt, A compression algorithm for the combination of PDF sets,Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 474 [arXiv:1504.06469] [INSPIRE]. [43] M. Czakon et al., Top-pair production at the LHC through NNLO QCD and NLO EW,JHEP 10 (2017) 186 [arXiv:1705.04105] [INSPIRE]. [44] S. Catani et al., Top-quark pair production at the LHC: fully differential QCD predictions at NNLO,JHEP 07 (2019) 100 [arXiv:1906.06535] [INSPIRE]. [45] ATLAS and CMS collaborations, Treatment of top-quark backgrounds in extreme phase spaces: the “top pTreweighting” and novel data-driven estimations in ATLAS and CMS, in the proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Top Quark Physics, online, 14–18 September 2021 [arXiv:2105.03977] [INSPIRE]. [46] M. Czakon and A. Mitov, Top++: a program for the calculation of the top-pair cross-section at hadron colliders,Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 2930 [arXiv:1112.5675] [INSPIRE]. [47] P. Bärnreuther, M. Czakon and A. Mitov, Percent level precision physics at the Tevatron: first genuine NNLO QCD corrections to q¯q→t¯ t+X,Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 132001 [arXiv:1204.5201] [INSPIRE]. [48] M. Czakon and A. Mitov, NNLO corrections to top-pair production at hadron colliders: the all-fermionic scattering channels,JHEP 12 (2012) 054 [arXiv:1207.0236] [INSPIRE]. [49] M. Czakon and A. Mitov, NNLO corrections to top pair production at hadron colliders: the quark-gluon reaction,JHEP 01 (2013) 080 [arXiv:1210.6832] [INSPIRE]. [50] M. Czakon, P. Fiedler and A. Mitov, Total top-quark pair-production cross section at hadron colliders through O(α4 S),Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 252004 [arXiv:1303.6254] [INSPIRE]. [51] C.D. White, S. Frixione, E. Laenen and F. Maltoni, Isolating W t production at the LHC, JHEP 11 (2009) 074 [arXiv:0908.0631] [INSPIRE]. [52] E. Re, Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method,Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1547 [arXiv:1009.2450] [INSPIRE]. [53] T. Gleisberg et al., Event generation with SHERPA 1.1,JHEP 02 (2009) 007 [arXiv:0811.4622] [INSPIRE]. [54] F. Cascioli et al., Precise Higgs-background predictions: merging NLO QCD and squared quark-loop corrections to four-lepton + 0,1jet production,JHEP 01 (2014) 046 [arXiv:1309.0500] [INSPIRE]. [55] Sherpa collaboration, Event generation with Sherpa 2.2,SciPost Phys. 7(2019) 034 [arXiv:1905.09127] [INSPIRE]. [56] ATLAS collaboration, Electron and photon performance measurements with the ATLAS detector using the 2015–2017 LHC proton-proton collision data,2019 JINST 14 P12006 [arXiv:1908.00005] [INSPIRE]. [57] ATLAS collaboration, Reconstruction of primary vertices at the ATLAS experiment in run 1 proton-proton collisions at the LHC,Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 332 [arXiv:1611.10235] [INSPIRE]. [58] ATLAS collaboration, Muon reconstruction and identification efficiency in ATLAS using the full run 2pp collision data set at √s= 13 TeV,Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 578 [arXiv:2012.00578] [INSPIRE]. – 55 – JHEP07(2023)141 [59] 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] [INSPIRE]. [60] M. Cacciari, G.P. Salam and G. Soyez, The anti-ktjet clustering algorithm,JHEP 04 (2008) 063 [arXiv:0802.1189] [INSPIRE]. [61] M. Cacciari, G.P. Salam and G. Soyez, FastJet user manual,Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 1896 [arXiv:1111.6097] [INSPIRE]. [62] 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 (2021) 689 [arXiv:2007.02645] [INSPIRE]. [63] 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] [INSPIRE]. [64] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of b-jet tagging efficiency with the ATLAS detector using t¯ tevents at √s= 13 TeV,JHEP 08 (2018) 089 [arXiv:1805.01845] [INSPIRE]. [65] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of the production cross-section for a Zboson in association with b-jets in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 07 (2020) 044 [arXiv:2003.11960] [INSPIRE]. [66] Particle Data Group collaboration, Review of particle physics,PTEP 2020 (2020) 083C01 [INSPIRE]. [67] G. Bohm and G. Zech, Introduction to statistics and measurement analysis for physicists,3rd revised edition, Verlag Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, Hamburg, Germany (2005) [DOI:10.3204/PUBDB-2017-08987] [INSPIRE]. [68] ATLAS collaboration, Evaluation of theoretical uncertainties for simplified template cross section measurements of V-associated production of the Higgs boson, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2018-035, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2018). [69] ATLAS collaboration, Jet energy scale measurements and their systematic uncertainties in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 072002 [arXiv:1703.09665] [INSPIRE]. [70] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of b-jet tagging efficiency with the ATLAS detector using t¯ tevents at √s= 13 TeV,JHEP 08 (2018) 089 [arXiv:1805.01845] [INSPIRE]. [71] N. Kidonakis, Two-loop soft anomalous dimensions for single top quark associated production with a W−or H−,Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 054018 [arXiv:1005.4451] [INSPIRE]. [72] ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of W±Zproduction cross sections and gauge boson polarisation in pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 535 [arXiv:1902.05759] [INSPIRE]. [73] ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of the t¯ tZ and t¯ tW cross sections in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 072009 [arXiv:1901.03584] [INSPIRE]. [74] G. Avoni et al., The new LUCID-2detector for luminosity measurement and monitoring in ATLAS,2018 JINST 13 P07017 [INSPIRE]. [75] E. Todesco and J. Wenninger, Large Hadron Collider momentum calibration and accuracy, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams 20 (2017) 081003 [INSPIRE]. – 56 – JHEP07(2023)141 Y. He 154, Y. He 127, M.P. Heath 52, N.B. Heatley 94, V. Hedberg 98, A.L. Heggelund 125, N.D. Hehir 94, C. Heidegger 54, K.K. Heidegger 54, W.D. Heidorn 81, J. Heilman 34, S. Heim 48, T. Heim 17a, J.G. Heinlein 128, J.J. Heinrich 123, L. Heinrich 110,aj, J. Hejbal 131, L. Helary 48, A. Held 170, S. Hellesund 125, C.M. Helling 164, S. Hellman 47a,47b, C. Helsens 36, R.C.W. Henderson91, L. Henkelmann 32, A.M. Henriques Correia36, H. Herde 98, Y. Hernández Jiménez 145, L.M. Herrmann 24, T. Herrmann 50, G. Herten 54, R. Hertenberger 109, L. Hervas 36, N.P. Hessey 156a, H. Hibi 84, E. Higón-Rodriguez 163, S.J. Hillier 20, I. Hinchliffe 17a, F. Hinterkeuser 24, M. Hirose 124, S. Hirose 157, D. Hirschbuehl 171, T.G. Hitchings 101, B. Hiti 93, J. Hobbs 145, R. Hobincu 27e, N. Hod 169, M.C. Hodgkinson 139, B.H. Hodkinson 32, A. Hoecker 36, J. Hofer 48, D. Hohn 54, T. Holm 24, M. Holzbock 110, L.B.A.H. Hommels 32, B.P. Honan 101, J. Hong 62c, T.M. Hong 129, J.C. Honig 54, B.H. Hooberman 162, W.H. Hopkins 6, Y. Horii 111, S. Hou 148, A.S. Howard 93, J. Howarth 59, J. Hoya 6, M. Hrabovsky 122, A. Hrynevich 48, T. Hryn’ova 4, P.J. Hsu 65, S.-C. Hsu 138, Q. Hu 41, Y.F. Hu 14a,14d,af , D.P. Huang 96, S. Huang 64b, X. Huang 14c, Y. Huang 62a, Y. Huang 14a, Z. Huang 101, Z. Hubacek 132, M. Huebner 24, F. Huegging 24, T.B. Huffman 126, M. Huhtinen 36, S.K. Huiberts 16, R. Hulsken 104, N. Huseynov 12,a, J. Huston 107, J. Huth 61, R. Hyneman 143, S. Hyrych 28a, G. Iacobucci 56, G. Iakovidis 29, I. Ibragimov 141, L. Iconomidou-Fayard 66, P. Iengo 72a,72b, R. Ignazzi42, R. Iguchi 153, T. Iizawa 56, Y. Ikegami 83, A. Ilg 19, N. Ilic 155, H. Imam 35a, T. Ingebretsen Carlson 47a,47b, G. Introzzi 73a,73b, M. Iodice 77a, V. Ippolito 75a,75b, M. Ishino 153, W. Islam 170, C. Issever 18,48, S. Istin 21a,ak, H. Ito 168, J.M. Iturbe Ponce 64a, R. Iuppa 78a,78b, A. Ivina 169, J.M. Izen 45, V. Izzo 72a, P. Jacka 131,132, P. Jackson 1, R.M. Jacobs 48, B.P. Jaeger 142, C.S. Jagfeld 109, P. Jain 54, G. Jäkel 171, K. Jakobs 54, T. Jakoubek 169, J. Jamieson 59, K.W. Janas 85a, G. Jarlskog 98, A.E. Jaspan 92, M. Javurkova 103, F. Jeanneau 135, L. Jeanty 123, J. Jejelava 149a,aa, P. Jenni 54,h, C.E. Jessiman 34, S. Jézéquel 4, C. Jia62b, J. Jia 145, X. Jia 61, X. Jia 14a,14d, Z. Jia 14c, Y. Jiang62a, S. Jiggins 52, J. Jimenez Pena 110, S. Jin 14c, A. Jinaru 27b, O. Jinnouchi 154, P. Johansson 139, K.A. Johns 7, J.W. Johnson 136, D.M. Jones 32, E. Jones 167, P. Jones 32, R.W.L. Jones 91, T.J. Jones 92, R. Joshi 119, J. Jovicevic 15, X. Ju 17a, J.J. Junggeburth 36, T. Junkermann 63a, A. Juste Rozas 13,u, S. Kabana 137e, A. Kaczmarska 86, M. Kado 75a,75b, H. Kagan 119, M. Kagan 143, A. Kahn41, A. Kahn 128, C. Kahra 100, T. Kaji 168, E. Kajomovitz 150, N. Kakati 169, C.W. Kalderon 29, A. Kamenshchikov 155, S. Kanayama 154, N.J. Kang 136, D. Kar 33g, K. Karava 126, M.J. Kareem 156b, E. Karentzos 54, I. Karkanias 152,f , S.N. Karpov 38, Z.M. Karpova 38, V. Kartvelishvili 91, A.N. Karyukhin 37, E. Kasimi 152,f , C. Kato 62d, J. Katzy 48, S. Kaur 34, K. Kawade 140, K. Kawagoe 89, T. Kawamoto 135, G. Kawamura55, E.F. Kay 165, F.I. Kaya 158, S. Kazakos 13, V.F. Kazanin 37, Y. Ke 145, J.M. Keaveney 33a, R. Keeler 165, G.V. Kehris 61, J.S. Keller 34, A.S. Kelly96, D. Kelsey 146, J.J. Kempster 146, K.E. Kennedy 41, P.D. Kennedy 100, O. Kepka 131, B.P. Kerridge 167, S. Kersten 171, B.P. Kerševan 93, S. Keshri 66, L. Keszeghova 28a, S. Ketabchi Haghighat 155, M. Khandoga 127, A. Khanov 121, A.G. Kharlamov 37, T. Kharlamova 37, E.E. Khoda 138, – 63 – JHEP07(2023)141 T.J. Khoo 18, G. Khoriauli 166, J. Khubua 149b, Y.A.R. Khwaira 66, M. Kiehn 36, A. Kilgallon 123, D.W. Kim 47a,47b, E. Kim 154, Y.K. Kim 39, N. Kimura 96, A. Kirchhoff 55, D. Kirchmeier 50, C. Kirfel 24, J. Kirk 134, A.E. Kiryunin 110, T. Kishimoto 153, D.P. Kisliuk155, C. Kitsaki 10, O. Kivernyk 24, M. Klassen 63a, C. Klein 34, L. Klein 166, M.H. Klein 106, M. Klein 92, S.B. Klein 56, U. Klein 92, P. Klimek 36, A. Klimentov 29, F. Klimpel 110, T. Klioutchnikova 36, P. Kluit 114, S. Kluth 110, E. Kneringer 79, T.M. Knight 155, A. Knue 54, D. Kobayashi89, R. Kobayashi 87, M. Kocian 143, P. Kodyš 133, D.M. Koeck 146, P.T. Koenig 24, T. Koffas 34, M. Kolb 135, I. Koletsou 4, T. Komarek 122, K. Köneke 54, A.X.Y. Kong 1, T. Kono 118, N. Konstantinidis 96, B. Konya 98, R. Kopeliansky 68, S. Koperny 85a, K. Korcyl 86, K. Kordas 152,f , G. Koren 151, A. Korn 96, S. Korn 55, I. Korolkov 13, N. Korotkova 37, B. Kortman 114, O. Kortner 110, S. Kortner 110, W.H. Kostecka 115, V.V. Kostyukhin 141, A. Kotsokechagia 135, A. Kotwal 51, A. Koulouris 36, A. Kourkoumeli-Charalampidi 73a,73b, C. Kourkoumelis 9, E. Kourlitis 6, O. Kovanda 146, R. Kowalewski 165, W. Kozanecki 135, A.S. Kozhin 37, V.A. Kramarenko 37, G. Kramberger 93, P. Kramer 100, M.W. Krasny 127, A. Krasznahorkay 36, J.A. Kremer 100, T. Kresse 50, J. Kretzschmar 92, K. Kreul 18, P. Krieger 155, S. Krishnamurthy 103, M. Krivos 133, K. Krizka 17a, K. Kroeninger 49, H. Kroha 110, J. Kroll 131, J. Kroll 128, K.S. Krowpman 107, U. Kruchonak 38, H. Krüger 24, N. Krumnack81, M.C. Kruse 51, J.A. Krzysiak 86, O. Kuchinskaia 37, S. Kuday 3a, D. Kuechler 48, J.T. Kuechler 48, S. Kuehn 36, R. Kuesters 54, T. Kuhl 48, V. Kukhtin 38, Y. Kulchitsky 37,a, S. Kuleshov 137d,137b, M. Kumar 33g, N. Kumari 102, A. Kupco 131, T. Kupfer49, A. Kupich 37, O. Kuprash 54, H. Kurashige 84, L.L. Kurchaninov 156a, Y.A. Kurochkin 37, A. Kurova 37, M. Kuze 154, A.K. Kvam 103, J. Kvita 122, T. Kwan 104, K.W. Kwok 64a, N.G. Kyriacou 106, L.A.O. Laatu 102, C. Lacasta 163, F. Lacava 75a,75b, H. Lacker 18, D. Lacour 127, N.N. Lad 96, E. Ladygin 38, B. Laforge 127, T. Lagouri 137e, S. Lai 55, I.K. Lakomiec 85a, N. Lalloue 60, J.E. Lambert 120, S. Lammers 68, W. Lampl 7, C. Lampoudis 152,f , A.N. Lancaster 115, E. Lançon 29, U. Landgraf 54, M.P.J. Landon 94, V.S. Lang 54, R.J. Langenberg 103, A.J. Lankford 160, F. Lanni 36, K. Lantzsch 24, A. Lanza 73a, A. Lapertosa 57b,57a, J.F. Laporte 135, T. Lari 71a, F. Lasagni Manghi 23b, M. Lassnig 36, V. Latonova 131, A. Laudrain 100, A. Laurier 150, S.D. Lawlor 95, Z. Lawrence 101, M. Lazzaroni 71a,71b, B. Le101, B. Leban 93, A. Lebedev 81, M. LeBlanc 36, T. LeCompte 6, F. Ledroit-Guillon 60, A.C.A. Lee96, G.R. Lee 16, S.C. Lee 148, S. Lee 47a,47b, T.F. Lee 92, L.L. Leeuw 33c, H.P. Lefebvre 95, M. Lefebvre 165, C. Leggett 17a, K. Lehmann 142, G. Lehmann Miotto 36, M. Leigh 56, W.A. Leight 103, A. Leisos 152,t, M.A.L. Leite 82c, C.E. Leitgeb 48, R. Leitner 133, K.J.C. Leney 44, T. Lenz 24, S. Leone 74a, C. Leonidopoulos 52, A. Leopold 144, C. Leroy 108, R. Les 107, C.G. Lester 32, M. Levchenko 37, J. Levêque 4, D. Levin 106, L.J. Levinson 169, M.P. Lewicki 86, D.J. Lewis 4, A. Li 5, B. Li 62b, C. Li62a, C-Q. Li 62c, H. Li 62a, H. Li 62b, H. Li 14c, H. Li 62b, J. Li 62c, K. Li 138, L. Li 62c, M. Li 14a,14d, Q.Y. Li 62a, S. Li 14a,14d, S. Li 62d,62c,e, T. Li 62b, X. Li 104, Z. Li 62b, Z. Li 126, Z. Li 104, Z. Li 92, Z. Li 14a,14d, Z. Liang 14a, M. Liberatore 48, B. Liberti 76a, K. Lie 64c, J. Lieber Marin 82b, H. Lien 68, K. Lin 107, R.A. Linck 68, R.E. Lindley 7, J.H. Lindon 2, – 64 – JHEP07(2023)141 A. Linss 48, E. Lipeles 128, A. Lipniacka 16, A. Lister 164, J.D. Little 4, B. Liu 14a, B.X. Liu 142, D. Liu 62d,62c, J.B. Liu 62a, J.K.K. Liu 32, K. Liu 62d,62c, M. Liu 62a, M.Y. Liu 62a, P. Liu 14a, Q. Liu 62d,138,62c, X. Liu 62a, Y. Liu 14c,14d, Y.L. Liu 106, Y.W. Liu 62a, M. Livan 73a,73b, J. Llorente Merino 142, S.L. Lloyd 94, E.M. Lobodzinska 48, P. Loch 7, S. Loffredo 76a,76b, T. Lohse 18, K. Lohwasser 139, M. Lokajicek 131, J.D. Long 162, I. Longarini 160, L. Longo 70a,70b, R. Longo 162, I. Lopez Paz 67, A. Lopez Solis 48, J. Lorenz 109, N. Lorenzo Martinez 4, A.M. Lory 109, X. Lou 47a,47b, X. Lou 14a,14d, A. Lounis 66, J. Love 6, P.A. Love 91, J.J. Lozano Bahilo 163, G. Lu 14a,14d, M. Lu 80, S. Lu 128, Y.J. Lu 65, H.J. Lubatti 138, C. Luci 75a,75b, F.L. Lucio Alves 14c, A. Lucotte 60, F. Luehring 68, I. Luise 145, O. Lukianchuk 66, O. Lundberg 144, B. Lund-Jensen 144, N.A. Luongo 123, M.S. Lutz 151, D. Lynn 29, H. Lyons92, R. Lysak 131, E. Lytken 98, F. Lyu 14a, V. Lyubushkin 38, T. Lyubushkina 38, M.M. Lyukova 145, H. Ma 29, L.L. Ma 62b, Y. Ma 96, D.M. Mac Donell 165, G. Maccarrone 53, J.C. MacDonald 139, R. Madar 40, W.F. Mader 50, J. Maeda 84, T. Maeno 29, M. Maerker 50, H. Maguire 139, D.J. Mahon 41, A. Maio 130a,130b,130d, K. Maj 85a, O. Majersky 48, S. Majewski 123, N. Makovec 66, V. Maksimovic 15, B. Malaescu 127, Pa. Malecki 86, V.P. Maleev 37, F. Malek 60, D. Malito 43b,43a, U. Mallik 80, C. Malone 32, S. Maltezos10, S. Malyukov38, J. Mamuzic 13, G. Mancini 53, G. Manco 73a,73b, J.P. Mandalia 94, I. Mandić 93, L. Manhaes de Andrade Filho 82a, I.M. Maniatis 169, J. Manjarres Ramos 50, D.C. Mankad 169, A. Mann 109, B. Mansoulie 135, S. Manzoni 36, A. Marantis 152,t, G. Marchiori 5, M. Marcisovsky 131, C. Marcon 71a,71b, M. Marinescu 20, M. Marjanovic 120, E.J. Marshall 91, Z. Marshall 17a, S. Marti-Garcia 163, T.A. Martin 167, V.J. Martin 52, B. Martin dit Latour 16, L. Martinelli 75a,75b, M. Martinez 13,u, P. Martinez Agullo 163, V.I. Martinez Outschoorn 103, P. Martinez Suarez 13, S. Martin-Haugh 134, V.S. Martoiu 27b, A.C. Martyniuk 96, A. Marzin 36, S.R. Maschek 110, D. Mascione 78a,78b, L. Masetti 100, T. Mashimo 153, J. Masik 101, A.L. Maslennikov 37, L. Massa 23b, P. Massarotti 72a,72b, P. Mastrandrea 74a,74b, A. Mastroberardino 43b,43a, T. Masubuchi 153, T. Mathisen 161, N. Matsuzawa153, J. Maurer 27b, B. Maček 93, D.A. Maximov 37, R. Mazini 148, I. Maznas 152,f , M. Mazza 107, S.M. Mazza 136, C. Mc Ginn 29, J.P. Mc Gowan 104, S.P. Mc Kee 106, E.F. McDonald 105, A.E. McDougall 114, J.A. Mcfayden 146, G. Mchedlidze 149b, R.P. Mckenzie 33g, T.C. Mclachlan 48, D.J. Mclaughlin 96, K.D. McLean 165, S.J. McMahon 134, P.C. McNamara 105, C.M. Mcpartland 92, R.A. McPherson 165,x, T. Megy 40, S. Mehlhase 109, A. Mehta 92, B. Meirose 45, D. Melini 150, B.R. Mellado Garcia 33g, A.H. Melo 55, F. Meloni 48, E.D. Mendes Gouveia 130a, A.M. Mendes Jacques Da Costa 20, H.Y. Meng 155, L. Meng 91, S. Menke 110, M. Mentink 36, E. Meoni 43b,43a, C. Merlassino 126, L. Merola 72a,72b, C. Meroni 71a, G. Merz106, O. Meshkov 37, J. Metcalfe 6, A.S. Mete 6, C. Meyer 68, J-P. Meyer 135, M. Michetti 18, R.P. Middleton 134, L. Mijović 52, G. Mikenberg 169, M. Mikestikova 131, M. Mikuž 93, H. Mildner 139, A. Milic 36, C.D. Milke 44, D.W. Miller 39, L.S. Miller 34, A. Milov 169, D.A. Milstead47a,47b, T. Min14c, A.A. Minaenko 37, I.A. Minashvili 149b, L. Mince 59, A.I. Mincer 117, B. Mindur 85a, M. Mineev 38, Y. Mino 87, L.M. Mir 13, M. Miralles Lopez 163, M. Mironova 126, – 65 – JHEP07(2023)141 M.C. Missio 113, T. Mitani 168, A. Mitra 167, V.A. Mitsou 163, O. Miu 155, P.S. Miyagawa 94, Y. Miyazaki89, A. Mizukami 83, J.U. Mjörnmark 98, T. Mkrtchyan 63a, M. Mlinarevic 96, T. Mlinarevic 96, M. Mlynarikova 36, T. Moa 47a,47b, S. Mobius 55, K. Mochizuki 108, P. Moder 48, P. Mogg 109, A.F. Mohammed 14a,14d, S. Mohapatra 41, G. Mokgatitswane 33g, B. Mondal 141, S. Mondal 132, K. Mönig 48, E. Monnier 102, L. Monsonis Romero163, J. Montejo Berlingen 83, M. Montella 119, F. Monticelli 90, N. Morange 66, A.L. Moreira De Carvalho 130a, M. Moreno Llácer 163, C. Moreno Martinez 56, P. Morettini 57b, S. Morgenstern 167, M. Morii 61, M. Morinaga 153, A.K. Morley 36, F. Morodei 75a,75b, L. Morvaj 36, P. Moschovakos 36, B. Moser 36, M. Mosidze149b, T. Moskalets 54, P. Moskvitina 113, J. Moss 31,o, E.J.W. Moyse 103, O. Mtintsilana 33g, S. Muanza 102, J. Mueller 129, D. Muenstermann 91, R. Müller 19, G.A. Mullier 161, J.J. Mullin128, D.P. Mungo 155, J.L. Munoz Martinez 13, D. Munoz Perez 163, F.J. Munoz Sanchez 101, M. Murin 101, W.J. Murray 167,134, A. Murrone 71a,71b, J.M. Muse 120, M. Muškinja 17a, C. Mwewa 29, A.G. Myagkov 37,a, A.J. Myers 8, A.A. Myers129, G. Myers 68, M. Myska 132, B.P. Nachman 17a, O. Nackenhorst 49, A. Nag 50, K. Nagai 126, K. Nagano 83, J.L. Nagle 29,ag, E. Nagy 102, A.M. Nairz 36, Y. Nakahama 83, K. Nakamura 83, H. Nanjo 124, R. Narayan 44, E.A. Narayanan 112, I. Naryshkin 37, M. Naseri 34, C. Nass 24, G. Navarro 22a, J. Navarro-Gonzalez 163, R. Nayak 151, A. Nayaz 18, P.Y. Nechaeva 37, F. Nechansky 48, L. Nedic 126, T.J. Neep 20, A. Negri 73a,73b, M. Negrini 23b, C. Nellist 113, C. Nelson 104, K. Nelson 106, S. Nemecek 131, M. Nessi 36,i, M.S. Neubauer 162, F. Neuhaus 100, J. Neundorf 48, R. Newhouse 164, P.R. Newman 20, C.W. Ng 129, Y.S. Ng18, Y.W.Y. Ng 48, B. Ngair 35e, H.D.N. Nguyen 108, R.B. Nickerson 126, R. Nicolaidou 135, J. Nielsen 136, M. Niemeyer 55, N. Nikiforou 36, V. Nikolaenko 37,a, I. Nikolic-Audit 127, K. Nikolopoulos 20, P. Nilsson 29, I. Ninca 48, H.R. Nindhito 56, G. Ninio 151, A. Nisati 75a, N. Nishu 2, R. Nisius 110, J-E. Nitschke 50, E.K. Nkadimeng 33g, S.J. Noacco Rosende 90, T. Nobe 153, D.L. Noel 32, Y. Noguchi 87, T. Nommensen 147, M.A. Nomura29, M.B. Norfolk 139, R.R.B. Norisam 96, B.J. Norman 34, J. Novak 93, T. Novak 48, O. Novgorodova 50, L. Novotny 132, R. Novotny 112, L. Nozka 122, K. Ntekas 160, N.M.J. Nunes De Moura Junior 82b, E. Nurse96, F.G. Oakham 34,ad, J. Ocariz 127, A. Ochi 84, I. Ochoa 130a, S. Oerdek 161, J.T. Offermann 39, A. Ogrodnik 85a, A. Oh 101, C.C. Ohm 144, H. Oide 83, R. Oishi 153, M.L. Ojeda 48, Y. Okazaki 87, M.W. O’Keefe92, Y. Okumura 153, A. Olariu27b, L.F. Oleiro Seabra 130a, S.A. Olivares Pino 137e, D. Oliveira Damazio 29, D. Oliveira Goncalves 82a, J.L. Oliver 160, M.J.R. Olsson 160, A. Olszewski 86, J. Olszowska 86,∗, Ö.O. Öncel 54, D.C. O’Neil 142, A.P. O’Neill 19, A. Onofre 130a,130e, P.U.E. Onyisi 11, M.J. Oreglia 39, G.E. Orellana 90, D. Orestano 77a,77b, N. Orlando 13, R.S. Orr 155, V. O’Shea 59, R. Ospanov 62a, G. Otero y Garzon 30, H. Otono 89, P.S. Ott 63a, G.J. Ottino 17a, M. Ouchrif 35d, J. Ouellette 29,ag, F. Ould-Saada 125, M. Owen 59, R.E. Owen 134, K.Y. Oyulmaz 21a, V.E. Ozcan 21a, N. Ozturk 8, S. Ozturk 21d, J. Pacalt 122, H.A. Pacey 32, K. Pachal 51, A. Pacheco Pages 13, C. Padilla Aranda 13, G. Padovano 75a,75b, S. Pagan Griso 17a, G. Palacino 68, A. Palazzo 70a,70b, S. Palestini 36, J. Pan 172, T. Pan 64a, D.K. Panchal 11, C.E. Pandini 114, J.G. Panduro Vazquez 95, H. Pang 14b, P. Pani 48, – 66 – JHEP07(2023)141 G. Panizzo 69a,69c, L. Paolozzi 56, C. Papadatos 108, S. Parajuli 44, A. Paramonov 6, C. Paraskevopoulos 10, D. Paredes Hernandez 64b, T.H. Park 155, M.A. Parker 32, F. Parodi 57b,57a, E.W. Parrish 115, V.A. Parrish 52, J.A. Parsons 41, U. Parzefall 54, B. Pascual Dias 108, L. Pascual Dominguez 151, V.R. Pascuzzi 17a, F. Pasquali 114, E. Pasqualucci 75a, S. Passaggio 57b, F. Pastore 95, P. Pasuwan 47a,47b, P. Patel 86, J.R. Pater 101, T. Pauly 36, J. Pearkes 143, M. Pedersen 125, R. Pedro 130a, S.V. Peleganchuk 37, O. Penc 36, E.A. Pender52, C. Peng 64b, H. Peng 62a, K.E. Penski 109, M. Penzin 37, B.S. Peralva 82d,82d, A.P. Pereira Peixoto 60, L. Pereira Sanchez 47a,47b, D.V. Perepelitsa 29,ag, E. Perez Codina 156a, M. Perganti 10, L. Perini 71a,71b,∗, H. Pernegger 36, S. Perrella 36, A. Perrevoort 113, O. Perrin 40, K. Peters 48, R.F.Y. Peters 101, B.A. Petersen 36, T.C. Petersen 42, E. Petit 102, V. Petousis 132, C. Petridou 152,f , A. Petrukhin 141, M. Pettee 17a, N.E. Pettersson 36, A. Petukhov 37, K. Petukhova 133, A. Peyaud 135, R. Pezoa 137f, L. Pezzotti 36, G. Pezzullo 172, T.M. Pham 170, T. Pham 105, P.W. Phillips 134, M.W. Phipps 162, G. Piacquadio 145, E. Pianori 17a, F. Piazza 71a,71b, R. Piegaia 30, D. Pietreanu 27b, A.D. Pilkington 101, M. Pinamonti 69a,69c, J.L. Pinfold 2, B.C. Pinheiro Pereira 130a, C. Pitman Donaldson96, D.A. Pizzi 34, L. Pizzimento 76a,76b, A. Pizzini 114, M.-A. Pleier 29, V. Plesanovs54, V. Pleskot 133, E. Plotnikova38, G. Poddar 4, R. Poettgen 98, L. Poggioli 127, I. Pogrebnyak 107, D. Pohl 24, I. Pokharel 55, S. Polacek 133, G. Polesello 73a, A. Poley 142,156a, R. Polifka 132, A. Polini 23b, C.S. Pollard 167, Z.B. Pollock 119, V. Polychronakos 29, E. Pompa Pacchi 75a,75b, D. Ponomarenko 113, L. Pontecorvo 36, S. Popa 27a, G.A. Popeneciu 27d, D.M. Portillo Quintero 156a, S. Pospisil 132, P. Postolache 27c, K. Potamianos 126, P.P. Potepa 85a, I.N. Potrap 38, C.J. Potter 32, H. Potti 1, T. Poulsen 48, J. Poveda 163, M.E. Pozo Astigarraga 36, A. Prades Ibanez 163, M.M. Prapa 46, J. Pretel 54, D. Price 101, M. Primavera 70a, M.A. Principe Martin 99, R. Privara 122, M.L. Proffitt 138, N. Proklova 128, K. Prokofiev 64c, G. Proto 76a,76b, S. Protopopescu 29, J. Proudfoot 6, M. Przybycien 85a, J.E. Puddefoot 139, D. Pudzha 37, P. Puzo66, D. Pyatiizbyantseva 37, J. Qian 106, D. Qichen 101, Y. Qin 101, T. Qiu 94, A. Quadt 55, M. Queitsch-Maitland 101, G. Quetant 56, G. Rabanal Bolanos 61, D. Rafanoharana 54, F. Ragusa 71a,71b, J.L. Rainbolt 39, J.A. Raine 56, S. Rajagopalan 29, E. Ramakoti 37, K. Ran 48,14d, N.P. Rapheeha 33g, V. Raskina 127, D.F. Rassloff 63a, S. Rave 100, B. Ravina 55, I. Ravinovich 169, M. Raymond 36, A.L. Read 125, N.P. Readioff 139, D.M. Rebuzzi 73a,73b, G. Redlinger 29, K. Reeves 45, J.A. Reidelsturz 171, D. Reikher 151, A. Rej 141, C. Rembser 36, A. Renardi 48, M. Renda 27b, M.B. Rendel110, F. Renner 48, A.G. Rennie 59, S. Resconi 71a, M. Ressegotti 57b,57a, E.D. Resseguie 17a, S. Rettie 36, J.G. Reyes Rivera 107, B. Reynolds119, E. Reynolds 17a, M. Rezaei Estabragh 171, O.L. Rezanova 37, P. Reznicek 133, N. Ribaric 91, E. Ricci 78a,78b, R. Richter 110, S. Richter 47a,47b, E. Richter-Was 85b, M. Ridel 127, S. Ridouani 35d, P. Rieck 117, P. Riedler 36, M. Rijssenbeek 145, A. Rimoldi 73a,73b, M. Rimoldi 48, L. Rinaldi 23b,23a, T.T. Rinn 29, M.P. Rinnagel 109, G. Ripellino 144, I. Riu 13, P. Rivadeneira 48, J.C. Rivera Vergara 165, F. Rizatdinova 121, E. Rizvi 94, C. Rizzi 56, B.A. Roberts 167, B.R. Roberts 17a, S.H. Robertson 104,x, M. Robin 48, D. Robinson 32, C.M. Robles Gajardo137f, M. Robles Manzano 100, A. Robson 59, A. Rocchi 76a,76b, – 67 – JHEP07(2023)141 C. Roda 74a,74b, S. Rodriguez Bosca 63a, Y. Rodriguez Garcia 22a, A. Rodriguez Rodriguez 54, A.M. Rodríguez Vera 156b, S. Roe36, J.T. Roemer 160, A.R. Roepe-Gier 120, J. Roggel 171, O. Røhne 125, R.A. Rojas 103, B. Roland 54, C.P.A. Roland 68, J. Roloff 29, A. Romaniouk 37, E. Romano 73a,73b, M. Romano 23b, A.C. Romero Hernandez 162, N. Rompotis 92, L. Roos 127, S. Rosati 75a, B.J. Rosser 39, E. Rossi 4, E. Rossi 72a,72b, L.P. Rossi 57b, L. Rossini 48, R. Rosten 119, M. Rotaru 27b, B. Rottler 54, C. Rougier 102,ai, D. Rousseau 66, D. Rousso 32, G. Rovelli 73a,73b, A. Roy 162, S. Roy-Garand 155, A. Rozanov 102, Y. Rozen 150, X. Ruan 33g, A. Rubio Jimenez 163, A.J. Ruby 92, V.H. Ruelas Rivera 18, T.A. Ruggeri 1, F. Rühr 54, A. Ruiz-Martinez 163, A. Rummler 36, Z. Rurikova 54, N.A. Rusakovich 38, H.L. Russell 165, J.P. Rutherfoord 7, K. Rybacki91, M. Rybar 133, E.B. Rye 125, A. Ryzhov 37, J.A. Sabater Iglesias 56, P. Sabatini 163, L. Sabetta 75a,75b, H.F-W. Sadrozinski 136, F. Safai Tehrani 75a, B. Safarzadeh Samani 146, M. Safdari 143, S. Saha 104, M. Sahinsoy 110, M. Saimpert 135, M. Saito 153, T. Saito 153, D. Salamani 36, G. Salamanna 77a,77b, A. Salnikov 143, J. Salt 163, A. Salvador Salas 13, D. Salvatore 43b,43a, F. Salvatore 146, A. Salzburger 36, D. Sammel 54, D. Sampsonidis 152,f , D. Sampsonidou 62d,62c, J. Sánchez 163, A. Sanchez Pineda 4, V. Sanchez Sebastian 163, H. Sandaker 125, C.O. Sander 48, J.A. Sandesara 103, M. Sandhoff 171, C. Sandoval 22b, D.P.C. Sankey 134, T. Sano 87, A. Sansoni 53, L. Santi 75a,75b, C. Santoni 40, H. Santos 130a,130b, S.N. Santpur 17a, A. Santra 169, K.A. Saoucha 139, J.G. Saraiva 130a,130d, J. Sardain 7, O. Sasaki 83, K. Sato 157, C. Sauer63b, F. Sauerburger 54, E. Sauvan 4, P. Savard 155,ad, R. Sawada 153, C. Sawyer 134, L. Sawyer 97, I. Sayago Galvan163, C. Sbarra 23b, A. Sbrizzi 23b,23a, T. Scanlon 96, J. Schaarschmidt 138, P. Schacht 110, D. Schaefer 39, U. Schäfer 100, A.C. Schaffer 66,44, D. Schaile 109, R.D. Schamberger 145, E. Schanet 109, C. Scharf 18, M.M. Schefer 19, V.A. Schegelsky 37, D. Scheirich 133, F. Schenck 18, M. Schernau 160, C. Scheulen 55, C. Schiavi 57b,57a, Z.M. Schillaci 26, E.J. Schioppa 70a,70b, M. Schioppa 43b,43a, B. Schlag 100,al, K.E. Schleicher 54, S. Schlenker 36, J. Schmeing 171, M.A. Schmidt 171, K. Schmieden 100, C. Schmitt 100, S. Schmitt 48, L. Schoeffel 135, A. Schoening 63b, P.G. Scholer 54, E. Schopf 126, M. Schott 100, J. Schovancova 36, S. Schramm 56, F. Schroeder 171, H-C. Schultz-Coulon 63a, M. Schumacher 54, B.A. Schumm 136, Ph. Schune 135, H.R. Schwartz 136, A. Schwartzman 143, T.A. Schwarz 106, Ph. Schwemling 135, R. Schwienhorst 107, A. Sciandra 136, G. Sciolla 26, F. Scuri 74a, F. Scutti105, C.D. Sebastiani 92, K. Sedlaczek 49, P. Seema 18, S.C. Seidel 112, A. Seiden 136, B.D. Seidlitz 41, C. Seitz 48, J.M. Seixas 82b, G. Sekhniaidze 72a, S.J. Sekula 44, L. Selem 4, N. Semprini-Cesari 23b,23a, S. Sen 51, D. Sengupta 56, V. Senthilkumar 163, L. Serin 66, L. Serkin 69a,69b, M. Sessa 77a,77b, H. Severini 120, F. Sforza 57b,57a, A. Sfyrla 56, E. Shabalina 55, R. Shaheen 144, J.D. Shahinian 128, D. Shaked Renous 169, L.Y. Shan 14a, M. Shapiro 17a, A. Sharma 36, A.S. Sharma 164, P. Sharma 80, S. Sharma 48, P.B. Shatalov 37, K. Shaw 146, S.M. Shaw 101, Q. Shen 62c,5, P. Sherwood 96, L. Shi 96, C.O. Shimmin 172, Y. Shimogama 168, J.D. Shinner 95, I.P.J. Shipsey 126, S. Shirabe 60, M. Shiyakova 38,am, J. Shlomi 169, M.J. Shochet 39, J. Shojaii 105, D.R. Shope 125, S. Shrestha 119,ah, E.M. Shrif 33g, M.J. Shroff 165, – 68 – JHEP07(2023)141 P. Sicho 131, A.M. Sickles 162, E. Sideras Haddad 33g, A. Sidoti 23b, F. Siegert 50, Dj. Sijacki 15, R. Sikora 85a, F. Sili 90, J.M. Silva 20, M.V. Silva Oliveira 36, S.B. Silverstein 47a, S. Simion66, R. Simoniello 36, E.L. Simpson 59, H. Simpson 146, L.R. Simpson 106, N.D. Simpson98, S. Simsek 21d, S. Sindhu 55, P. Sinervo 155, S. Singh 142, S. Singh 155, S. Sinha 48, S. Sinha 33g, M. Sioli 23b,23a, I. Siral 36, S.Yu. Sivoklokov 37,∗, J. Sjölin 47a,47b, A. Skaf 55, E. Skorda 98, P. Skubic 120, M. Slawinska 86, V. Smakhtin169, B.H. Smart 134, J. Smiesko 36, S.Yu. Smirnov 37, Y. Smirnov 37, L.N. Smirnova 37,a, O. Smirnova 98, A.C. Smith 41, E.A. Smith 39, H.A. Smith 126, J.L. Smith 92, R. Smith143, M. Smizanska 91, K. Smolek 132, A. Smykiewicz 86, A.A. Snesarev 37, H.L. Snoek 114, S. Snyder 29, R. Sobie 165,x, A. Soffer 151, C.A. Solans Sanchez 36, E.Yu. Soldatov 37, U. Soldevila 163, A.A. Solodkov 37, S. Solomon 54, A. Soloshenko 38, K. Solovieva 54, O.V. Solovyanov 40, V. Solovyev 37, P. Sommer 36, A. Sonay 13, W.Y. Song 156b, J.M. Sonneveld 114, A. Sopczak 132, A.L. Sopio 96, F. Sopkova 28b, V. Sothilingam63a, S. Sottocornola 68, R. Soualah 116b, Z. Soumaimi 35e, D. South 48, S. Spagnolo 70a,70b, M. Spalla 110, F. Spanò 95, D. Sperlich 54, G. Spigo 36, M. Spina 146, S. Spinali 91, D.P. Spiteri 59, M. Spousta 133, E.J. Staats 34, A. Stabile 71a,71b, R. Stamen 63a, M. Stamenkovic 114, A. Stampekis 20, M. Standke 24, E. Stanecka 86, M.V. Stange 50, B. Stanislaus 17a, M.M. Stanitzki 48, M. Stankaityte 126, B. Stapf 48, E.A. Starchenko 37, G.H. Stark 136, J. Stark 102,ai, D.M. Starko156b, P. Staroba 131, P. Starovoitov 63a, S. Stärz 104, R. Staszewski 86, G. Stavropoulos 46, J. Steentoft 161, P. Steinberg 29, A.L. Steinhebel 123, B. Stelzer 142,156a, H.J. Stelzer 129, O. Stelzer-Chilton 156a, H. Stenzel 58, T.J. Stevenson 146, G.A. Stewart 36, M.C. Stockton 36, G. Stoicea 27b, M. Stolarski 130a, S. Stonjek 110, A. Straessner 50, J. Strandberg 144, S. Strandberg 47a,47b, M. Strauss 120, T. Strebler 102, P. Strizenec 28b, R. Ströhmer 166, D.M. Strom 123, L.R. Strom 48, R. Stroynowski 44, A. Strubig 47a,47b, S.A. Stucci 29, B. Stugu 16, J. Stupak 120, N.A. Styles 48, D. Su 143, S. Su 62a, W. Su 62d,138,62c, X. Su 62a,66, K. Sugizaki 153, V.V. Sulin 37, M.J. Sullivan 92, D.M.S. Sultan 78a,78b, L. Sultanaliyeva 37, S. Sultansoy 3b, T. Sumida 87, S. Sun 106, S. Sun 170, O. Sunneborn Gudnadottir 161, M.R. Sutton 146, M. Svatos 131, M. Swiatlowski 156a, T. Swirski 166, I. Sykora 28a, M. Sykora 133, T. Sykora 133, D. Ta 100, K. Tackmann 48,v, A. Taffard 160, R. Tafirout 156a, J.S. Tafoya Vargas 66, R.H.M. Taibah 127, R. Takashima 88, K. Takeda 84, E.P. Takeva 52, Y. Takubo 83, M. Talby 102, A.A. Talyshev 37, K.C. Tam 64b, N.M. Tamir151, A. Tanaka 153, J. Tanaka 153, R. Tanaka 66, M. Tanasini 57b,57a, J. Tang62c, Z. Tao 164, S. Tapia Araya 137f, S. Tapprogge 100, A. Tarek Abouelfadl Mohamed 107, S. Tarem 150, K. Tariq 62b, G. Tarna 102,27b, G.F. Tartarelli 71a, P. Tas 133, M. Tasevsky 131, E. Tassi 43b,43a, A.C. Tate 162, G. Tateno 153, Y. Tayalati 35e,w, G.N. Taylor 105, W. Taylor 156b, H. Teagle92, A.S. Tee 170, R. Teixeira De Lima 143, P. Teixeira-Dias 95, J.J. Teoh 155, K. Terashi 153, J. Terron 99, S. Terzo 13, M. Testa 53, R.J. Teuscher 155,x, A. Thaler 79, O. Theiner 56, N. Themistokleous 52, T. Theveneaux-Pelzer 18, O. Thielmann 171, D.W. Thomas95, J.P. Thomas 20, E.A. Thompson 17a, P.D. Thompson 20, E. Thomson 128, E.J. Thorpe 94, Y. Tian 55, V. Tikhomirov 37,a, Yu.A. Tikhonov 37, S. Timoshenko37, E.X.L. Ting 1, P. Tipton 172, S. Tisserant 102, S.H. Tlou 33g, A. Tnourji 40, K. Todome 23b,23a, S. Todorova-Nova 133, – 69 – JHEP07(2023)141 S. Todt50, M. Togawa 83, J. Tojo 89, S. Tokár 28a, K. Tokushuku 83, O. Toldaiev 68, R. Tombs 32, M. Tomoto 83,111, L. Tompkins 143,al, K.W. Topolnicki 85b, P. Tornambe 103, E. Torrence 123, H. Torres 50,ai, E. Torró Pastor 163, M. Toscani 30, C. Tosciri 39, M. Tost 11, D.R. Tovey 139, A. Traeet16, I.S. Trandafir 27b, T. Trefzger 166, A. Tricoli 29, I.M. Trigger 156a, S. Trincaz-Duvoid 127, D.A. Trischuk 26, B. Trocmé 60, C. Troncon 71a, L. Truong 33c, M. Trzebinski 86, A. Trzupek 86, F. Tsai 145, M. Tsai 106, A. Tsiamis 152,f , P.V. Tsiareshka37, S. Tsigaridas 156a, A. Tsirigotis 152,t, V. Tsiskaridze 145, E.G. Tskhadadze149a, M. Tsopoulou 152,f , Y. Tsujikawa 87, I.I. Tsukerman 37, V. Tsulaia 17a, S. Tsuno 83, O. Tsur150, D. Tsybychev 145, Y. Tu 64b, A. Tudorache 27b, V. Tudorache 27b, A.N. Tuna 36, S. Turchikhin 38, I. Turk Cakir 3a, R. Turra 71a, T. Turtuvshin 38,y, P.M. Tuts 41, S. Tzamarias 152,f , P. Tzanis 10, E. Tzovara 100, K. Uchida153, F. Ukegawa 157, P.A. Ulloa Poblete 137c, E.N. Umaka 29, G. Unal 36, M. Unal 11, A. Undrus 29, G. Unel 160, J. Urban 28b, P. Urquijo 105, G. Usai 8, R. Ushioda 154, M. Usman 108, Z. Uysal 21b, L. Vacavant 102, V. Vacek 132, B. Vachon 104, K.O.H. Vadla 125, T. Vafeiadis 36, A. Vaitkus 96, C. Valderanis 109, E. Valdes Santurio 47a,47b, M. Valente 156a, S. Valentinetti 23b,23a, A. Valero 163, A. Vallier 102,ai, J.A. Valls Ferrer 163, D.R. Van Arneman 114, T.R. Van Daalen 138, P. Van Gemmeren 6, M. Van Rijnbach 125,36, S. Van Stroud 96, I. Van Vulpen 114, M. Vanadia 76a,76b, W. Vandelli 36, M. Vandenbroucke 135, E.R. Vandewall 121, D. Vannicola 151, L. Vannoli 57b,57a, R. Vari 75a, E.W. Varnes 7, C. Varni 17a, T. Varol 148, D. Varouchas 66, L. Varriale 163, K.E. Varvell 147, M.E. Vasile 27b, L. Vaslin40, G.A. Vasquez 165, F. Vazeille 40, T. Vazquez Schroeder 36, J. Veatch 31, V. Vecchio 101, M.J. Veen 103, I. Veliscek 126, L.M. Veloce 155, F. Veloso 130a,130c, S. Veneziano 75a, A. Ventura 70a,70b, A. Verbytskyi 110, M. Verducci 74a,74b, C. Vergis 24, M. Verissimo De Araujo 82b, W. Verkerke 114, J.C. Vermeulen 114, C. Vernieri 143, P.J. Verschuuren 95, M. Vessella 103, M.C. Vetterli 142,ad, A. Vgenopoulos 152,f , N. Viaux Maira 137f, T. Vickey 139, O.E. Vickey Boeriu 139, G.H.A. Viehhauser 126, L. Vigani 63b, M. Villa 23b,23a, M. Villaplana Perez 163, E.M. Villhauer52, E. Vilucchi 53, M.G. Vincter 34, G.S. Virdee 20, A. Vishwakarma 52, C. Vittori 36, I. Vivarelli 146, V. Vladimirov167, E. Voevodina 110, F. Vogel 109, P. Vokac 132, J. Von Ahnen 48, E. Von Toerne 24, B. Vormwald 36, V. Vorobel 133, K. Vorobev 37, M. Vos 163, K. Voss 141, J.H. Vossebeld 92, M. Vozak 114, L. Vozdecky 94, N. Vranjes 15, M. Vranjes Milosavljevic 15, M. Vreeswijk 114, R. Vuillermet 36, O. Vujinovic 100, I. Vukotic 39, S. Wada 157, C. Wagner103, W. Wagner 171, S. Wahdan 171, H. Wahlberg 90, R. Wakasa 157, M. Wakida 111, V.M. Walbrecht 110, J. Walder 134, R. Walker 109, W. Walkowiak 141, A.M. Wang 61, A.Z. Wang 170, C. Wang 100, C. Wang 62c, H. Wang 17a, J. Wang 64a, R.-J. Wang 100, R. Wang 61, R. Wang 6, S.M. Wang 148, S. Wang 62b, T. Wang 62a, W.T. Wang 80, X. Wang 14c, X. Wang 162, X. Wang 62c, Y. Wang 62d, Y. Wang 14c, Z. Wang 106, Z. Wang 62d,51,62c, Z. Wang 106, A. Warburton 104, R.J. Ward 20, N. Warrack 59, A.T. Watson 20, H. Watson 59, M.F. Watson 20, G. Watts 138, B.M. Waugh 96, A.F. Webb 11, C. Weber 29, H.A. Weber 18, M.S. Weber 19, S.M. Weber 63a, C. Wei62a, Y. Wei 126, A.R. Weidberg 126, J. Weingarten 49, M. Weirich 100, C. Weiser 54, C.J. Wells 48, T. Wenaus 29, – 70 – JHEP07(2023)141 B. Wendland 49, T. Wengler 36, N.S. Wenke110, N. Wermes 24, M. Wessels 63a, K. Whalen 123, A.M. Wharton 91, A.S. White 61, A. White 8, M.J. White 1, D. Whiteson 160, L. Wickremasinghe 124, W. Wiedenmann 170, C. Wiel 50, M. Wielers 134, C. Wiglesworth 42, L.A.M. Wiik-Fuchs 54, D.J. Wilbern120, H.G. Wilkens 36, D.M. Williams 41, H.H. Williams128, S. Williams 32, S. Willocq 103, P.J. Windischhofer 126, F. Winklmeier 123, B.T. Winter 54, J.K. Winter 101, M. Wittgen143, M. Wobisch 97, R. Wölker 126, J. Wollrath160, M.W. Wolter 86, H. Wolters 130a,130c, V.W.S. Wong 164, A.F. Wongel 48, S.D. Worm 48, B.K. Wosiek 86, K.W. Woźniak 86, K. Wraight 59, J. Wu 14a,14d, M. Wu 64a, M. Wu 113, S.L. Wu 170, X. Wu 56, Y. Wu 62a, Z. Wu 135,62a, J. Wuerzinger 126, T.R. Wyatt 101, B.M. Wynne 52, S. Xella 42, L. Xia 14c, M. Xia14b, J. Xiang 64c, X. Xiao 106, M. Xie 62a, X. Xie 62a, S. Xin 14a,14d, J. Xiong 17a, I. Xiotidis146, D. Xu 14a, H. Xu62a, H. Xu 62a, L. Xu 62a, R. Xu 128, T. Xu 106, W. Xu 106, Y. Xu 14b, Z. Xu 62b, Z. Xu 14a, B. Yabsley 147, S. Yacoob 33a, N. Yamaguchi 89, Y. Yamaguchi 154, H. Yamauchi 157, T. Yamazaki 17a, Y. Yamazaki 84, J. Yan62c, S. Yan 126, Z. Yan 25, H.J. Yang 62c,62d, H.T. Yang 62a, S. Yang 62a, T. Yang 64c, X. Yang 62a, X. Yang 14a, Y. Yang 44, Y. Yang62a, Z. Yang 62a,106, W-M. Yao 17a, Y.C. Yap 48, H. Ye 14c, H. Ye 55, J. Ye 44, S. Ye 29, X. Ye 62a, Y. Yeh 96, I. Yeletskikh 38, B.K. Yeo 17a, M.R. Yexley 91, P. Yin 41, K. Yorita 168, S. Younas 27b, C.J.S. Young 54, C. Young 143, Y. Yu 62a, M. Yuan 106, R. Yuan 62b,l, L. Yue 96, X. Yue 63a, M. Zaazoua 35e, B. Zabinski 86, E. Zaid52, T. Zakareishvili 149b, N. Zakharchuk 34, S. Zambito 56, J.A. Zamora Saa 137d,137b, J. Zang 153, D. Zanzi 54, O. Zaplatilek 132, S.V. Zeißner 49, C. Zeitnitz 171, J.C. Zeng 162, D.T. Zenger Jr 26, O. Zenin 37, T. Ženiš 28a, S. Zenz 94, S. Zerradi 35a, D. Zerwas 66, M. Zhai 14a,14d, B. Zhang 14c, D.F. Zhang 139, J. Zhang 62b, J. Zhang 6, K. Zhang 14a,14d, L. Zhang 14c, P. Zhang14a,14d, R. Zhang 170, S. Zhang 106, T. Zhang 153, X. Zhang 62c, X. Zhang 62b, Y. Zhang 62c,5, Z. Zhang 17a, Z. Zhang 66, H. Zhao 138, P. Zhao 51, T. Zhao 62b, Y. Zhao 136, Z. Zhao 62a, A. Zhemchugov 38, X. Zheng 62a, Z. Zheng 143, D. Zhong 162, B. Zhou106, C. Zhou 170, H. Zhou 7, N. Zhou 62c, Y. Zhou7, C.G. Zhu 62b, C. Zhu 14a,14d, H.L. Zhu 62a, H. Zhu 14a, J. Zhu 106, Y. Zhu 62c, Y. Zhu 62a, X. Zhuang 14a, K. Zhukov 37, V. Zhulanov 37, N.I. Zimine 38, J. Zinsser 63b, M. Ziolkowski 141, L. Živković 15, A. Zoccoli 23b,23a, K. Zoch 56, T.G. Zorbas 139, O. Zormpa 46, W. Zou 41, 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 – 71 – JHEP07(2023)141 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)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;(d)Istinye University, Sariyer, 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 – 72 –