Properties of the Higgs boson with mass near 125 GeV are measured in protonproton collisions with the CMS experiment at the LHC. A comprehensive set of production and decay measurements are combined. The decays to $\gamma\gamma$, ZZ, WW, $\tau\tau$, and bb pairs are exploited, including studies targeting Higgs bosons produced in association with a pair of top quarks. The data samples were collected in 2011 and 2012 and correspond to integrated luminosities of up to 5.1 fb$^{1}$ at 7 TeV and up to 19.7 fb$^{1}$ at 8 TeV; the final detector calibration and alignment are used in the event reconstruction. From the highresolution $\gamma\gamma$ and ZZ channels, the mass of this Higgs boson is measured to be $125.03 \,^{+0.26}_{0.27}\,\text{(stat.)} \,^{+0.13}_{0.15}\,\text{(syst.)}$ GeV, with the precision dominated by the statistical uncertainty. For this mass, the event yields obtained in the different analyses tagging specific decay modes and production mechanisms are consistent with those expected for the standard model Higgs boson. The combined bestfit signal strength, relative to the standard model expectation, is found to be $1.00 \,\pm0.09\,\text{(stat.)} \,^{+0.08}_{0.07}\,\text{(theo.)} \,\pm0.07\,\text{(syst.)}$ at the measured mass. Various searches for deviations in the magnitudes of the Higgs boson scalar couplings from those predicted for the standard model are performed. No significant deviations are found.
Plot  Caption 

(Left) 1D test statistics (Right) 2D 68% CL contours for a hypothesized Higgs boson mass m_{H} and signal strength 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

2D test statistics 

2D test statistics 

2D test statistics 
Significance (m_{H} = 125.0 GeV)  

Combination  Expected (prefit)  Expected (postfit)  Observed 
H→ZZ tagged  6.3 σ  6.3 σ  6.5 σ 
H→γγ tagged  5.1 σ  5.3 σ  5.6 σ 
H→WW tagged  5.7 σ  5.4 σ  4.7 σ 
H→bb tagged  2.2 σ  2.3 σ  2.0 σ 
H→ττ tagged  4.1 σ  3.9 σ  3.8 σ 
The expected significance is computed for the background + SM Higgs signal hypothesis (with μ=σ/σ_{SM}=1). The prefit expected significance is computed for the nominal value of the nuisance parameters, while the postfit expected significance is computed setting the nuisance parameters to their bestfit values.
Plot  Caption 

Values of the bestfit σ/σ_{SM} for the combination (solid vertical line) and for subcombinations by predominant decay mode and additional tags targeting a particular production mechanism. The vertical band shows the overall σ/σ_{SM} uncertainty. The σ/σ_{SM} ratio denotes the production cross section times the relevant branching fractions, relative to the SM expectation. The horizontal bars indicate the ±1 standard deviation uncertainties in the bestfit σ/σ_{SM} values for the individual modes; they include both statistical and systematic uncertainties.  
Values of the bestfit σ/σ_{SM} for the combination (solid vertical line) and for subcombinations by predominant decay mode. The vertical band shows the overall σ/σ_{SM} uncertainty. The σ/σ_{SM} ratio denotes the production cross section times the relevant branching fractions, relative to the SM expectation. The horizontal bars indicate the ±1 standard deviation uncertainties in the bestfit σ/σ_{SM} values for the individual modes; they include both statistical and systematic uncertainties.  
Values of the bestfit σ/σ_{SM} for the combination (solid vertical line) and for subcombinations by analysis tags targeting individual production mechanisms. The vertical band shows the overall σ/σ_{SM} uncertainty. The σ/σ_{SM} ratio denotes the production cross section times the relevant branching fractions, relative to the SM expectation. The horizontal bars indicate the ±1 standard deviation uncertainties in the bestfit σ/σ_{SM} values for the individual modes; they include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. 
The tables below contain the same information that is shown in Figure 4 of the HIG14009 PAS.
Grouping  μ̂ = σ/σ_{SM} (m_{H} = 125.0 GeV)  

by production tag and predominant decay mode  value  uncertainty 
H → ZZ (2 jets)  1.549  0.661/+ 0.953 
H → ZZ (0/1 jet)  0.883  0.272/+ 0.336 
H → ττ (ttH tag)  1.325  3.600/+ 6.078 
H → ττ (VH tag)  0.867  0.883/+ 0.998 
H → ττ (VBF tag)  0.948  0.379/+ 0.431 
H → ττ (0/1 jet)  0.843  0.382/+ 0.423 
H → WW (ttH tag)  3.939  1.435/+ 1.698 
H → WW (VH tag)  0.800  0.934/+ 1.088 
H → WW (VBF tag)  0.623  0.479/+ 0.593 
H → WW (0/1 jet)  0.766  0.205/+ 0.228 
H → γγ (ttH tag)  2.671  1.726/+ 2.414 
H → γγ (VH tag)  0.574  0.806/+ 0.935 
H → γγ (VBF tag)  1.514  0.476/+ 0.551 
H → γγ (untagged)  1.007  0.259/+ 0.293 
H → bb (ttH tag)  0.650  1.809/+ 1.849 
H → bb (VH tag)  1.008  0.499/+ 0.527 
by predominant decay mode  value  uncertainty 
H → ZZ tagged  1.003  0.263/+ 0.317 
H → WW tagged  0.832  0.200/+ 0.224 
H → γγ tagged  1.126  0.228/+ 0.259 
H → ττ tagged  0.912  0.263/+ 0.286 
H → bb tagged  0.932  0.482/+ 0.506 
by production tag  value  uncertainty 
ttH tagged  2.762  0.923/+ 1.052 
VH tagged  0.890  0.372/+ 0.387 
VBF tagged  1.140  0.251/+ 0.282 
Untagged  0.865  0.139/+ 0.176 
The 68% CL regions (bounded by the solid curves) for signal strength of the ggH and ttH, and of the VBF and VH production mechanisms: μ_{ggH,ttH} and μ _{VBF,VH}, respectively. The different colors show the results obtained by combining data from each of the five analyzed decay mode groups: γγ (green), WW (blue), ZZ(red), ττ (violet), bb (cyan). The crosses indicate the bestfit values. The diamond at (1,1) indicates the expected values for the SM Higgs boson. 

1D test statistics 
Channel grouping  Best fit (μ_{ggH,ttH}, μ_{VBF,VH}) 
H → ZZ tagged  $(0.88,1.75)$ 
H → γγ tagged  $(1.07,1.24)$ 
H → WW tagged  $(0.87,0.66)$ 
H → ττ tagged  $(0.52,1.21)$ 
H → bb tagged  $(0.57,0.96)$ 
Combined best fit μ_{VBF,VH}/μ_{ggH,ttH}  
Observed (expected)  
$1.25_{0.45}^{+0.63}$ ($1.00_{0.35}^{+0.49}$) 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 
Parameter  Best fit result (68% CL) for full combination 
Observed significance ($\sigma$)  Expected sensitivity ($\sigma$)  Pull to SM hypothesis ($\sigma$) 
μ_{ggH}  $0.85_{0.17}^{+0.19}$  6.5  7.5  0.8 
μ_{VBF}  $1.15_{0.35}^{+0.37}$  3.6  3.3  0.4 
μ_{VH}  $1.00_{0.40}^{+0.40}$  2.7  2.7  0.0 
μ_{ttH}  $2.93_{0.97}^{+1.04}$  3.5  1.2  2.1 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 

Summary of the fits to the full data assuming independent signal strengths for each of the four production modes, while the decay branching fractions are assumed to be as in the SM. The best fit of the signal strengths are shown, with the corresponding 68% and 95% CL intervals.  
Summary of the fits to the 7 TeV data assuming independent signal strengths for each of the four production modes, while the decay branching fractions are assumed to be as in the SM. The best fit of the signal strengths are shown, with the corresponding 68% and 95% CL intervals.  
Summary of the fits to the 8 TeV data assuming independent signal strengths for each of the four production modes, while the decay branching fractions are assumed to be as in the SM. The best fit of the signal strengths are shown, with the corresponding 68% and 95% CL intervals. 
Parameter  Best fit result (68% CL) for 7 TeV data  Best fit result (68% CL) for 8 TeV data 
μ_{ggH}  $1.00^{+0.36}_{0.32}$  $0.80^{+0.19}_{0.17}$ 
μ_{VBF}  $1.78^{+0.97}_{0.91}$  $1.02^{+0.39}_{0.36}$ 
μ_{VH}  $0.69^{+0.98}_{0.66}$  $1.06^{+0.45}_{0.43}$ 
μ_{ttH}  $0.00^{+2.13}_{0.00}$  $3.22^{+1.14}_{1.00}$ 
The observed results for the ratio of μ(VBF,VH) to μ(ggH,ttH) are given for the individual channels and the full combination.
Channel grouping  Best fit μ_{VBF,VH}/μ_{ggH,ttH} 
H → ZZ tagged  2.00 
H → γγ tagged  1.15 
H → WW tagged  0.65 
H → ττ tagged  2.55 
Combined  1.25 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

2D test statistics 

2D test statistics 
1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

2D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

2D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

The likelihood scan versus 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 

1D test statistics 
The coupling scale factors to fermions and vector bosons are expressed in terms of a mass scaling parameter $\epsilon$ and a “vacuum expectation value” parameter $M$, described in arXiv:1207.1693. The coupling scale factors to fermions are $\kappa_{f,i}=v\cdot m_{f,i}^{\epsilon} / M^{1+\epsilon}$ and the coupling scale factors to vector bosons are $\kappa_{V,j}=v\cdot m_{V,j}^{2\epsilon} / M^{1+2\epsilon}$, where $v\approx246$ GeV is the SM vacuum expectation value, $m_{f,i}$ are the fermion masses, and $m_{V,i}$ are the vector boson masses. The SM expectation of $\kappa_{f,i}=\kappa_{V,i}=1$ is recovered in the double limit of $\epsilon=0$ and $M=v$.
2D test statistics 
Plot  Caption 

Summary of the fits for deviations in the coupling for the LHC XS WG benchmark models (arXiv:1307.1347). For each model, the best fit values of the most interesting parameters are shown, with the corresponding 68% and 95% CL intervals. The list of parameters for each model and the numerical values of the intervals are provided in Table 3 of the PAS.  
Summary of the fits for deviations in the coupling for the generic sixparameter model including effective loop couplings. The best fit of the parameters are shown, with the corresponding 68% and 95% CL intervals. The result of the fit when extending the model to allow for beyondSM decays while restricting the effective coupling to vector bosons to not exceed unity (κ_{V} ≤ 1.0) is also shown.  
Summary of the fits for deviations in the coupling ratios for the general sevenparameter model with effective loop couplings. The best fit of the parameters are shown, with the corresponding 68% and 95% CL intervals.  
Summary of the fits for deviations in the coupling for the generic fiveparameter model not effective loop couplings. In this model, loopinduced couplings are assumed to follow the SM structure as in arXiv:1307.1347. The best fit values of the parameters are shown, with the corresponding 68% and 95% CL intervals.  
Summary of the fits for deviations in the coupling for the generic fiveparameter model not effective loop couplings, expressed as function of the particle mass. For the fermions, the values of the fitted yukawa couplings hff are shown, while for vector bosons the squareroot of the coupling for the hVV vertex divided by twice the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs boson field. Particle masses for leptons and weak boson, and the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs boson are taken from the PDG. For the top quark the same mass used in theoretical calculations is used (172.5 GeV) and for the bottom quark the running mass m_{b}(m_{H}=125.0 GeV)=2.763 GeV is used. In this model, loopinduced couplings are assumed to follow the SM structure as in arXiv:1307.1347.  
Summary of the fits for deviations in the coupling for the generic fiveparameter model not effective loop couplings, expressed as function of the particle mass. For the fermions, the values of the fitted yukawa couplings hff are shown, while for vector bosons the squareroot of the coupling for the hVV vertex divided by twice the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs boson field. Particle masses for leptons and weak boson, and the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs boson are taken from the PDG. For the top quark the same mass used in theoretical calculations is used (172.5 GeV) and for the bottom quark the running mass m_{b}(m_{H}=125.0 GeV)=2.763 GeV is used. In this model, loopinduced couplings are assumed to follow the SM structure as in arXiv:1307.1347. The solid black line with 68% and 95% CL bands are taken from the fit to data with the model $(M,\epsilon)$. 