Figure | Caption |
---|---|
![]() |
Figure 1: The signal topology targeted in this note: chargino-neutralino pair production leading to the WH+ETmiss final state. |
![]() |
Table 1: Summary of results for the single lepton analysis. The expected background contributions are compared to the observed yields in data for the four signal regions. The expectations from a few signal points are indicated; the first number indicates $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ ($= M_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$) and the second number indicates $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$. The uncertainties that are shown contain statistical and systematic uncertainties. |
![]() |
Figure 2a: Dijet mass for the single lepton analysis signal region with ETmiss > 100 GeV and all cuts applied except dijet mass. The data are compared to the sum of the expected backgrounds. The signal region is the bin from 100 to 150 GeV. Three sample signal model points are also indicated. The uncertainty band includes the statistical and systematic uncertainty on the background prediction. |
![]() |
Figure 2b: Dijet mass for the single lepton analysis signal region with ETmiss > 125 GeV and all cuts applied except dijet mass. The data are compared to the sum of the expected backgrounds. The signal region is the bin from 100 to 150 GeV. Three sample signal model points are also indicated. The uncertainty band includes the statistical and systematic uncertainty on the background prediction. |
![]() |
Figure 2c: Dijet mass for the single lepton analysis signal region with ETmiss > 150 GeV and all cuts applied except dijet mass. The data are compared to the sum of the expected backgrounds. The signal region is the bin from 100 to 150 GeV. Three sample signal model points are also indicated. The uncertainty band includes the statistical and systematic uncertainty on the background prediction. |
![]() |
Figure 2d: Dijet mass for the single lepton analysis signal region with ETmiss > 175 GeV and all cuts applied except dijet mass. The data are compared to the sum of the expected backgrounds. The signal region is the bin from 100 to 150 GeV. Three sample signal model points are also indicated. The uncertainty band includes the statistical and systematic uncertainty on the background prediction. |
![]() |
Figure 3: The observed $M_{ljj}$ distribution in the same-sign dilepton analysis, compared to the sum of the expected backgrounds, after all selection requirements except that on $M_{ljj}$. An example signal model point with $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = M_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$ = 130 GeV and $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV is overlaid. The signal normalization has been scaled up by a factor of 5 relative to the theory prediction. |
![]() |
Table 2: Summary of results for the same-sign dilepton analysis. The expected background contributions are compared to the observed yields in data. The uncertainties that are shown contain statistical and systematic uncertainties. The expected signal yields in several example model points are also indicated. |
![]() |
Table 3: Multi-lepton results, along with the number of expected signal events, in the 5 best signal regions for the $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}= M_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$ = 130 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV model point. All signal regions shown have exactly three selected leptons, a veto on b-tagged jets, and HT < 200 GeV. The results are binned in the number of hadronic $\tau$ candidates and the ETmiss. Above Z (below Z) indicates the presence of an OSSF pair with invariant mass $M_{\ell\ell} >$ 105 GeV (< 75 GeV). |
![]() |
Figure 4: The interpretation of the combined results from the three search channels. The upper limit on the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ production cross section is indicated in the color scale. The expected and observed regions for which the signal model is excluded reach from the origin to the solid red and solid black curve, respectively. The dashed red lines show the $\pm 1\sigma$ variations on the expected limit due to experimental uncertainties and the thin black lines indicate the uncertainty due to the cross section calculation. |
![]() |
Figure 5a: The interpretations of the results from the single lepton search. The black curves show the expected (dashed) and observed (solid) limits on the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ cross section times $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \to WH)$. The green band shows the $\pm 1\sigma$ variations on the expected limit due to experimental uncertainties. The solid blue curve shows the theoretical prediction for the cross section, with the dashed blue bands indicating the uncertainty on the cross section calculation. |
![]() |
Figure 5b: The interpretations of the results from the same-sign dilepton search. The black curves show the expected (dashed) and observed (solid) limits on the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ cross section times $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \to WH)$. The green band shows the $\pm 1\sigma$ variations on the expected limit due to experimental uncertainties. The solid blue curve shows the theoretical prediction for the cross section, with the dashed blue bands indicating the uncertainty on the cross section calculation. |
![]() |
Figure 5c: The interpretations of the results from the multi-lepton search. The black curves show the expected (dashed) and observed (solid) limits on the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ cross section times $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \to WH)$. The green band shows the $\pm 1\sigma$ variations on the expected limit due to experimental uncertainties. The solid blue curve shows the theoretical prediction for the cross section, with the dashed blue bands indicating the uncertainty on the cross section calculation. |
![]() |
Figure 5d: The interpretations of the results from the combination of the three searches. The black curves show the expected (dashed) and observed (solid) limits on the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ cross section times $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \to WH)$. The green band shows the $\pm 1\sigma$ variations on the expected limit due to experimental uncertainties. The solid blue curve shows the theoretical prediction for the cross section, with the dashed blue bands indicating the uncertainty on the cross section calculation. |
![]() |
Table 4: Multi-lepton results, along with the number of expected signal events, in the 5 best signal regions for the $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}= M_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$ = 150 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV model point. All signal regions shown have exactly three selected leptons, a veto on b-tagged jets, and HT < 200 GeV. The results are binned in the number of hadronic $\tau$ candidates and the ETmiss. Above Z (below Z) indicates the presence of an OSSF pair with invariant mass $M_{\ell\ell} >$ 105 GeV (< 75 GeV). |
![]() |
Table 5: Multi-lepton results, along with the number of expected signal events, in the 5 best signal regions for the $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}= M_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$ = 200 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV model point. All signal regions shown have exactly three selected leptons, a veto on b-tagged jets, and HT < 200 GeV. The results are binned in the number of hadronic $\tau$ candidates and the ETmiss. Above Z (below Z) indicates the presence of an OSSF pair with invariant mass $M_{\ell\ell} >$ 105 GeV (< 75 GeV). |
![]() |
Table 6: Multi-lepton results, along with the number of expected signal events, in the 5 best signal regions for the $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}= M_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$ = 300 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV model point. All signal regions shown have exactly three selected leptons, a veto on b-tagged jets, and HT < 200 GeV. The results are binned in the number of hadronic $\tau$ candidates and the ETmiss. Above Z (below Z) indicates the presence of an OSSF pair with invariant mass $M_{\ell\ell} >$ 105 GeV (< 75 GeV). |
![]() |
Table 7: Multi-lepton results, along with the number of expected signal events, in the 5 best signal regions for the $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}= M_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$ = 400 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV model point. All signal regions shown have exactly three selected leptons, a veto on b-tagged jets, and HT < 200 GeV. The results are binned in the number of hadronic $\tau$ candidates and the ETmiss. Above Z (below Z) indicates the presence of an OSSF pair with invariant mass $M_{\ell\ell} >$ 105 GeV (< 75 GeV). |
Figure | Caption |
---|---|
![]() |
Additional Figure 1: Dijet mass in CR-2l after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 2: ETmiss in CR-2l after preselection and the dijet mass requirement. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 3: MT in CR-2l after preselection and the dijet mass requirement. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 4: MT2bl in CR-2l after preselection and the dijet mass requirement. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 5: Dijet mass in CR-0b after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 6: ETmiss in CR-0b after preselection and the dijet mass requirement. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 7: MT in CR-0b after preselection and the dijet mass requirement. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 8: MT2bl in CR-0b after preselection and the dijet mass requirement. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 9: Ratio of data over prediction for CR-2l after preselection, the dijet mass requirement, and either the MT or MT2bl cut. This plot is used to derive a scale factor and uncertainty of 1.0 +/- 0.4 on the dilepton top background, indicated by the magenta lines. The uncertainties shown are statistical. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 10: Ratio of data over prediction for CR-Mbb after preselection, the dijet mass requirement, and the MT2bl cut. This plot is used to derive a scale factor and uncertainty of 0.75 +/- 0.25 for the efficiency of the single lepton backgrounds to pass the MT2bl cut, indicated by the magenta lines. The uncertainties shown are statistical. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 11: Ratio of data over prediction for CR-0b after preselection, the dijet mass requirement, and the MT2bl and MT cuts. This plot is used to derive a scale factor and uncertainty of 1.1 +/- 0.1 for the efficiency of the W+jets backgrounds to pass the MT cut, indicated by the magenta lines. The uncertainties shown are statistical. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 12: Ratio of data over prediction for CR-Mbb after all cuts except ETmiss and with all scale factors applied. This plot is used to validate the total background prediction. The uncertainties shown are statistical. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 13: Dijet mass after analysis preselection. The total prediction has been normalized to data in the plot to show the shape agreement. An example signal point is overlaid, scaled up by a factor of 20. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 14: ETmiss after analysis preselection and the dijet mass requirement. The total prediction has been normalized to data in the plot to show the shape agreement. An example signal point is overlaid, scaled up by a factor of 10. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 15: MT after analysis preselection and the dijet mass requirement. The total prediction has been normalized to data in the plot to show the shape agreement. An example signal point is overlaid, scaled up by a factor of 10. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 16: MT2bl after analysis preselection and the dijet mass requirement. The total prediction has been normalized to data in the plot to show the shape agreement. An example signal point is overlaid, scaled up by a factor of 10. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 17: Selected best signal region for each mass point, based on the expected cross-section limits. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 18: Estimated 5$\sigma$ discovery reach in 300 fb$^{-1}$ 14 TeV data, in the plane of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ mass vs. the common mass of the $\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ and $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$ particles. The signal and background yields for the tightest signal region ($E_{T}^{miss} > 175$ GeV) of the single lepton analysis are extrapolated based on the increased production cross section and the factor of 15 increase in the integrated luminosity. In scenario A, the same systematic uncertainty on the background prediction as in the 8 TeV analysis (25%) is assumed; in scenario B this systematic uncertainty is reduced by a factor of 2. |
Figure | Caption |
---|---|
![]() |
Additional Figure 1: Max $M_{T}$ after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 2: ETmiss after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 3: $M_{ljj}$ after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 4: $M_{T2}^{j}$ after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 5: Number of CSVL b-tagged jets after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 6: Number of CSVT b-tagged jets after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 7: p$_{T}$ of the highest p$_{T}$ lepton after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 8: p$_{T}$ of the lowest p$_{T}$ lepton after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 9: p$_{T}$ of the third lepton, if present, after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 10: $\Delta \eta$ between leptons after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 11: Total yield after preselection, including a breakdown by flavor. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 13: Background and data yields after preselection. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 14: Electron fake rate as a function of $\eta$. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 15: Electron fake rate as a function of p$_{T}$. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 16: Electron fake rate as a function of p$_{T}$, with and without the electroweak correction. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 17: Muon fake rate as a function of $\eta$. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 18: Muon fake rate as a function of p$_{T}$. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 19: Muon fake rate as a function of p$_{T}$, with and without the electroweak correction. |
Figure | Caption |
---|---|
![]() |
Additional Figure 1: The signal topology targeted in this note: chargino-neutralino pair production leading to the WH+ETmiss final state, where H → WW |
![]() |
Additional Figure 2: The signal topology targeted in this note: chargino-neutralino pair production leading to the WH+ETmiss final state, where H → ZZ |
![]() |
Additional Figure 3: The signal topology targeted in this note: chargino-neutralino pair production leading to the WH+ETmiss final state, where H → τ τ. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 4: A comparison of data and simulation for the ETmiss distribution for events with an opposite-sign electron-muon pair, a dataset dominated by ttbar production, shown in absolute yields. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 5: A comparison of data and simulation for the HT distribution for events with an opposite-sign electron-muon pair, a dataset dominated by ttbar production, shown in absolute yields. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 6: Isolation distribution used for data-driven background estimation. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 7: ETmiss distribution in WZ control region (3-leptons including 1 on-Z OSSF pair, HT < 200 GeV, and Transverse mass between 50 and 100 GeV) |
![]() |
Additional Figure 8: The transverse mass distribution of events in a data sample enriched in WZ requiring an OSSF pair with invariant mass in the Z-window and 50 GeV < ETmiss < 100 GeV (Linear Scale). |
![]() |
Additional Figure 9: Background breakdown vs ETmiss for 3-leptons (no OSSF pair or hadronic taus), no b-tag, with signal at $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 130 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV stacked on top of the SM background. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 10: Background breakdown vs ETmiss for 3-leptons (no OSSF pair) including 1 hadronic tau, no b-tag, with signal at $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 130 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV stacked on top of the SM background. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 11: Background breakdown vs ETmiss for 3-leptons including 1 OSSF pair above Z, no hadronic tau, no b-tag, with signal at $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 130 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV stacked on top of the SM background. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 12: Background breakdown vs ETmiss for 3-leptons including 1 OSSF pair below Z, no hadronic tau, no b-tag, with signal at $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 130 GeV, $M_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 1 GeV stacked on top of the SM background. |
Figure | Caption |
---|---|
![]() |
Additional Figure 1: Interpretation of the combined results. Results are the same as Fig. 5d in the PAS, except that here the ratio of cross section upper limit to theory prediction is displayed. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 2: Summary of the interpretations for the combined results and the results from the three individual channels. Cross section upper limits are compared to the theory prediction. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 3: Summary of the interpretations for the combined results and the results from the three individual channels. The ratio of cross section limit to theory prediction is displayed. |
![]() |
Additional Figure 4: Summary plot of the observed excluded regions in this analysis and in several models from SUS-13-006 "Search for electroweak production of charginos, neutralinos, and sleptons using leptonic final states in pp collisions at √s = 8 TeV". |
![]() |
Additional Figure 4(alternate): Alternate version of summary plot above. Summary plot of the observed and expected excluded regions in this analysis and in several models from SUS-13-006 "Search for electroweak production of charginos, neutralinos, and sleptons using leptonic final states in pp collisions at √s = 8 TeV". |