Properties of the observed Higgs-like resonance decaying into two photons

This is a condensed description with plots for the analysis CMS-HIG-13-016

Table of contents

Abstract

Analyses are reported on properties of the recently discovered Higgs-like resonance around 125 GeV in its decay to two photons. The analyses are performed using the 2011 (2012) dataset recorded by the CMS experiment at the LHC from pp collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 7 (8) TeV. The dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 5.1 (19.6) fb−1. The spin analysis is evaluated on the 2012 dataset alone. An upper limit on the natural width of the observed resonance is found to be 6.9 GeV at 95% confidence level. A search has been performed for second Higgs-like states in therange110 < mH < 150!GeV.Spin hypothesis tests have been performed comparing the Standard Model Higgs with a spin-2 graviton-like model with minimal couplings. The current data cannot exclude this particular model of spin-2 whilst the data are compatible with the Standard Model Higgs at the 1σ level.

Main Results

Studies of some of the properties of the observed Higgs-like signal have been performed in the two photon decay channel with 5.1 (19.6) fb−1 of pp collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 7 (8) TeV with the CMS detector. The natural width of the new state is found to be < 6.9 GeV (expected < 5.9 GeV) at 95% C.L. Exclusion limits have been set on second Higgs scenarios either supposing another Higgs elsewhere or that the observed signal is shared between two nearly degenerate mass states. The SM spin-0 hypothesis is compared to a graviton like spin-2 hypothesis with minimal couplings. With the present data this particular spin-2 model cannot be ruled out. The observed data is found to be compatible with the SM with a χ2 p-value of 0.68.

Figures and Tables from the PAS

Tables

Figure Label Description
pdf png Table 1: List of separate sources of systematic uncertainty accounted for in the analyses. The value show is the magnitude of variation from the source which is applied as an uncertainty to the signal model.
pdf png Table 2: The expected number of spin-0 and spin-2 signal events (each category’s contribution to the total as a percentage), the effective width, σeff , and the full width at half the maximum divided by 2.35 at mH=125 GeV, the expected number of background events at mγγ = 125 GeV and the observed number of events at mγγ = 125 GeV for each of the 20 event classes.
pdf png Table 5: The χ2 compatibility of the 0+ and 2+m models with the observation.

Figures

SM Extensions

Figure Label Description
pdf png Figure 1: A scan of the negative-log-likelihood as a function of the Higgs decay width. The observed (expected) upper limit on the width is 6.9 (5.9) GeV at 95% confidence level.
pdf png Figure 2: Exclusion limit on σ BR for another Higgs state with SM couplings taking the observed state at 125 GeV as part of the background.
pdf png Figure 3 (left): Exclusion limit on σ BR for another Higgs state, which is produced by gluon fusion only, taking the observed state at 125 GeV as part of the background.
pdf png Figure 3 (right): Exclusion limit on σ BR for another Higgs state, which is produced by vector-boson fusion and W- and Z-boson associated production only, taking the observed state at 125 GeV as part of the background.
pdf png Figure 4 (left): The expected 2D negative-log-likelihood scan for two near mass-degenerate states parameterised by ˆ†m (the mass difference between the states) and x (the fraction of signal in the lower mass state). The solid and dashed lines correspond to the 68% and 95% confidence level contours respectively.
pdf png Figure 4 (right): The observed 2D negative-log-likelihood scan for two near mass-degenerate states parameterised by ˆ†m (the mass difference between the states) and x (the fraction of signal in the lower mass state). The black cross shows the best fit value, the solid and dashed lines correspond to the 68% and 95% confidence level contours respectively.

Spin Analysis

Figure Label Description
pdf png Figure 5 (left): The distribution of cos(θ∗) before any selection cuts. The three histograms represent the spin 0+ distribution with all SM production modes (red circular points), the spin 2+m distribution with the gluon-fusion production mode (green square points) and the 2+m distribution with the quark-antiquark annihilation production mode (blue triangular points).
pdf png Figure 5 (right): The distribution of cos(θ∗ ) after the selection cuts. The three histograms represent the spin 0+ distribution with all SM production modes (red circular points), the spin 2+m distribution with the gluon-fusion production mode (green square points) and the spin 2+m distribution with the quark-antiquark annihilation production mode (blue triangular points).
pdf png Figure 6: Acceptance efficiency ratio between the 2+m (gluon-fusion production) and the 0+ (all SM production modes) of the event selection as a function of cos(θ∗) split into kinematic categories.
pdf png Figure 7: The SM extracted signal as a function of cos(θ∗) for the 0+ expectation (red line), 2+m expectation with gluon-fusion production only (blue line), the 2+m expectation with quark-antiquark annihilation production only (green line), the 2+m expectation with half gg, half qq production (magenta line) and the observation (black points).
pdf png Figure 8: The distribution of the test statistic for pseudo experiments generated under the 0+, SM, hypothesis (orange) and the graviton-like, 2+m, hypothesis (blue) with 0% quark-antiquark production. The observed value in the data is shown as the red arrow.
pdf png Figure 8: The distribution of the test statistic for pseudo experiments generated under the 0+, SM, hypothesis (orange) and the graviton-like, 2+m, hypothesis (blue) with 25% quark-antiquark production. The observed value in the data is shown as the red arrow.
pdf png Figure 8: The distribution of the test statistic for pseudo experiments generated under the 0+, SM, hypothesis (orange) and the graviton-like, 2+m, hypothesis (blue) with 50% quark-antiquark production. The observed value in the data is shown as the red arrow.
pdf png Figure 8: The distribution of the test statistic for pseudo experiments generated under the 0+, SM, hypothesis (orange) and the graviton-like, 2+m, hypothesis (blue) with 75% quark-antiquark production. The observed value in the data is shown as the red arrow.
pdf png Figure 8: The distribution of the test statistic for pseudo experiments generated under the 0+, SM, hypothesis (orange) and the graviton-like, 2+m, hypothesis (blue) with 100% quark-antiquark production. The observed value in the data is shown as the red arrow.
pdf png Figure 9: The distribution of the test statistic for pseudo experiments thrown under the 0+, SM, hypothesis (red) and the graviton-like, 2+m, hypothesis (blue) as a function of the fraction of qq production relative to gg production. The observed distribution in the data is shown by the black points.

Additional plots for public talks

Cos(θ) distribution in data

Figure Label Description
pdf png The distribution of cos(θ∗ ) after the selection cuts plotted with the data from three different 5!GeV windows. The three histograms represent the spin 0+ distribution with all SM production modes (red circular points), the spin 2+m distribution with the gluon-fusion production mode (green square points) and the spin 2+m distribution with the quark-antiquark annihilation production mode (blue triangular points). The three sets of markers represent the cos(θ∗ ) distribution in data for three 5!GeV windows around mγγ=120, 125 and 130 GeV.

Spin analysis background model fits to data

Figure Label Description
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 0. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 1. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 2. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 3. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 4. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 5. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 6. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 7. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 8. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 9. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 10. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 11. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 12. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 13. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 14. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 15. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 16. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 17. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 18. The category definition is shown in the plot label.
pdf png Background-only fit to data in the spin analysis in category 19. The category definition is shown in the plot label.

Spin Model fits to data

Figure Label Description
pdf png The 0+, Standard Model, best fit to the data in bins of cos(θ∗).
pdf png The 2+m (gg only) model best fit to the data in bins of cos(θ∗).
pdf png The 2+m (qq only) model best fit to the data in bins of cos(θ∗).
pdf png The 2+m (50%gg and 50%qq) model best fit to the data in bins of cos(θ∗).
Topic attachments
I Attachment History Action Size Date Who Comment
PDFpdf 7and8TeV_obslimit_float.pdf r3 r2 r1 manage 18.3 K 2013-06-25 - 15:41 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng 7and8TeV_obslimit_float.png r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 792.2 K 2013-06-26 - 11:49 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf 7and8TeV_obslimit_ggh.pdf r3 r2 r1 manage 18.3 K 2013-06-25 - 15:41 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng 7and8TeV_obslimit_ggh.png r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 792.7 K 2013-06-26 - 11:49 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf 7and8TeV_obslimit_vbfwzh.pdf r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 19.2 K 2013-06-25 - 15:41 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng 7and8TeV_obslimit_vbfwzh.png r5 r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 792.2 K 2013-06-26 - 11:49 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf BestFit125Grav50GG50QQtoData.pdf r2 r1 manage 14.3 K 2013-06-26 - 15:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng BestFit125Grav50GG50QQtoData.png r2 r1 manage 548.9 K 2013-06-26 - 15:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf BestFit125GravGGtoData.pdf r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 14.2 K 2013-06-26 - 15:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng BestFit125GravGGtoData.png r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 543.8 K 2013-06-26 - 15:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf BestFit125GravQQtoData.pdf r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 14.2 K 2013-06-26 - 15:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng BestFit125GravQQtoData.png r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 546.1 K 2013-06-26 - 15:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf BestFit125SMtoData.pdf r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 14.3 K 2013-06-26 - 15:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng BestFit125SMtoData.png r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 539.1 K 2013-06-26 - 15:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf Chi2Table.pdf r3 r2 r1 manage 65.3 K 2013-06-20 - 17:51 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng Chi2Table.png r2 r1 manage 116.2 K 2013-06-20 - 17:51 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf SignalTable.pdf r2 r1 manage 132.8 K 2013-06-25 - 16:44 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng SignalTable.png r2 r1 manage 301.1 K 2013-06-25 - 16:44 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf Spin2_AccEffRatioToSM_ggX.pdf r1 manage 39.8 K 2013-06-19 - 11:25 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng Spin2_AccEffRatioToSM_ggX.png r1 manage 152.0 K 2013-06-19 - 11:25 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf SystematicsTable.pdf r2 r1 manage 122.9 K 2013-06-25 - 16:44 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng SystematicsTable.png r2 r1 manage 205.3 K 2013-06-25 - 16:44 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf afterCuts.pdf r1 manage 92.2 K 2013-06-19 - 11:25 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng afterCuts.png r1 manage 117.3 K 2013-06-19 - 11:25 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf beforeCuts.pdf r1 manage 80.5 K 2013-06-19 - 11:24 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng beforeCuts.png r1 manage 98.9 K 2013-06-19 - 11:24 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf cs_data.pdf r2 r1 manage 19.7 K 2013-06-26 - 13:21 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng cs_data.png r2 r1 manage 455.9 K 2013-06-26 - 13:21 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf deltaMvsx.pdf r1 manage 31.1 K 2013-06-19 - 11:24 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng deltaMvsx.png r1 manage 105.9 K 2013-06-19 - 11:24 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf deltaMvsxExp.pdf r1 manage 28.8 K 2013-06-19 - 11:24 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng deltaMvsxExp.png r1 manage 89.3 K 2013-06-19 - 11:24 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf fqqbar.pdf r3 r2 r1 manage 15.3 K 2013-06-26 - 13:12 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng fqqbar.png r3 r2 r1 manage 465.2 K 2013-06-26 - 13:12 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf modIndep.pdf r2 r1 manage 15.7 K 2013-06-26 - 13:12 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng modIndep.png r2 r1 manage 476.3 K 2013-06-26 - 13:12 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf sep_fqq_0.pdf r2 r1 manage 15.6 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng sep_fqq_0.png r2 r1 manage 14.9 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf sep_fqq_100.pdf r2 r1 manage 15.2 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng sep_fqq_100.png r2 r1 manage 13.8 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf sep_fqq_25.pdf r2 r1 manage 15.6 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng sep_fqq_25.png r2 r1 manage 15.5 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf sep_fqq_50.pdf r2 r1 manage 15.7 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng sep_fqq_50.png r2 r1 manage 14.5 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf sep_fqq_75.pdf r2 r1 manage 15.7 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng sep_fqq_75.png r2 r1 manage 14.6 K 2013-06-20 - 17:42 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat0.pdf r1 manage 36.0 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat0.png r1 manage 32.8 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat1.pdf r1 manage 36.2 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat1.png r1 manage 35.4 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat10.pdf r1 manage 35.9 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat10.png r1 manage 32.9 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat11.pdf r1 manage 35.4 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat11.png r1 manage 33.4 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat12.pdf r1 manage 35.8 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat12.png r1 manage 34.1 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat13.pdf r1 manage 35.9 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat13.png r1 manage 33.2 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat14.pdf r1 manage 35.6 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat14.png r1 manage 32.9 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat15.pdf r1 manage 36.0 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat15.png r1 manage 31.9 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat16.pdf r1 manage 36.0 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat16.png r1 manage 32.1 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat17.pdf r1 manage 36.1 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat17.png r1 manage 33.2 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat18.pdf r1 manage 36.4 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat18.png r1 manage 34.3 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat19.pdf r1 manage 36.0 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat19.png r1 manage 33.8 K 2013-06-19 - 13:06 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat2.pdf r1 manage 36.2 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat2.png r1 manage 35.2 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat3.pdf r1 manage 36.1 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat3.png r1 manage 34.1 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat4.pdf r1 manage 35.5 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat4.png r1 manage 34.2 K 2013-06-19 - 13:03 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat5.pdf r1 manage 36.4 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat5.png r1 manage 33.9 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat6.pdf r1 manage 36.4 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat6.png r1 manage 34.4 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat7.pdf r1 manage 36.3 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat7.png r1 manage 33.5 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat8.pdf r1 manage 36.5 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat8.png r1 manage 33.4 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf spincat9.pdf r1 manage 35.3 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng spincat9.png r1 manage 32.2 K 2013-06-19 - 13:05 MatthewKenzie  
PDFpdf width.pdf r2 r1 manage 15.2 K 2013-06-23 - 22:35 MatthewKenzie  
PNGpng width.png r3 r2 r1 manage 492.3 K 2013-06-26 - 11:49 MatthewKenzie  
Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r14 < r13 < r12 < r11 < r10 | Backlinks | Raw View | WYSIWYG | More topic actions
Topic revision: r14 - 2013-07-02 - MatthewKenzie
 
    • Cern Search Icon Cern Search
    • TWiki Search Icon TWiki Search
    • Google Search Icon Google Search

    CMSPublic All webs login

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright & 2008-2018 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback