HIG-17-009

$HeadURL:svn+ssh://svn.cern.ch/reps/tdr2/papers/HIG-17-009/trunk/HIG-17-009.tex$
$Id:HIG-17-009.tex4712662018-08-0717:35:09Zcvernier$

HIG-17-009

# Search for resonant pair production of Higgs bosons decaying to bottom
quark-antiquark pairs in proton-proton collisions at 13

###### Abstract

A search for a narrow-width resonance decaying into two Higgs bosons, each
decaying into a bottom quark-antiquark pair, is presented. The search is
performed using proton-proton collision data corresponding to an integrated
luminosity of 35.9at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$ recorded by the CMS detector at the
LHC. No evidence for such a signal is observed. Upper limits are set on the
product of the production cross section for the resonance and the branching
fraction for the selected decay mode in the resonance mass range from 260 to
1200.

##  0.1 Introduction

The discovery of a Higgs boson ($\PH$) [1, 2, 3], with mass of 125 [4, 5] and
properties consistent with the standard model (SM) of particle physics at the
CERN LHC, motivates searches for resonances via their decays into Higgs
bosons. Several theories for physics beyond the SM posit narrow-width
resonances decaying into pairs of Higgs bosons ($\PH\PH$). For instance,
models with a warped extra dimension [6] predict the existence of new
particles such as the spin-0 radion [7, 8, 9] and the spin-2 first
Kaluza–Klein (KK) excitation of the graviton [10, 11, 12], which could decay
to $\PH\PH$. These models have an extra warped spatial dimension compactified
between two branes, with an exponential metric ${\kappa l}$, $\kappa$ being
the curvature and $l$ the coordinate of the extra spatial dimension [13]. The
benchmark of the model is the ultraviolet cutoff of the theory,
$\Lambda\equiv\sqrt{8\pi}e^{-\kappa l}{\Mpl}$, being the Planck scale. In
proton-proton ($\Pp\Pp$) collisions at the LHC, the graviton and the radion
are produced primarily through gluon-gluon fusion and are predicted to decay
to $\PH\PH$ with branching fractions of approximately 10 and 23%, respectively
[14].

Previous searches for resonant $\PH\PH$ production have been performed by the
ATLAS and CMS Collaborations with $\Pp\Pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ and 13.
The decay channels studied include $\bbbar\bbbar$ [15, 16, 17],
$\bbbar\tau\tau$ [18], $\bbbar\gamma\gamma$ [19, 20], $\gamma\gamma\PW\PW$
[21], and $\bbbar\PW\PW$ [22].

This paper reports the results of a search for narrow-width resonances in the
260–1200mass range, decaying into a pair of Higgs bosons, each decaying into a
pair of bottom quarks. The search is performed using $\Pp\Pp$ collision data
collected at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$ with the CMS detector at the CERN LHC,
corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9. The main challenge of this
search is to discriminate the final-state signature of four bottom quark jets
from the overwhelming multijet quantum chromodynamics (QCD) background. This
is addressed by dedicated online selection criteria that include jet
identification and by a model of the multijet background that is tested in
control regions of data. The analysis closely follows the approach adopted for
the 8data [15] but the sensitivity for high resonance mass values is enhanced
because of the significant increase in production cross section at 13, a new
trigger strategy and a more efficient algorithm for identifying jets
originating from bottom quarks.

##  0.2 Detector and simulated samples

The central feature of the CMS apparatus is a superconducting solenoid of 6m
internal diameter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8T. A silicon pixel and
strip tracker, a lead tungstate crystal electromagnetic calorimeter, and a
brass and scintillator hadron calorimeter, each composed of a barrel and two
endcap sections, reside within the solenoid. Forward calorimeters extend the
pseudorapidity ($\eta$) [23] coverage provided by the barrel and endcap
detectors. Muons are detected in gas-ionization chambers embedded in the steel
flux-return yoke outside the solenoid. A more detailed description of the CMS
detector, together with a definition of the coordinate system used and the
relevant kinematic variables, can be found in Ref. [23]

Simulated samples of signal events are produced using various Monte Carlo (MC)
event generators, with the CMS detector response modeled using the [24]
program. To model the production of a generic narrow-width spin-0 resonance,
we use an MC simulation of the bulk radion produced through gluon fusion. The
momenta and angular distributions for decay products of a spin-2 resonance are
distinct from those for a spin-0 resonance, and result in different kinematic
distributions. Therefore, we evaluate the signal efficiencies for a narrow-
width spin-2 resonance from a separate simulation of the first excitation of a
bulk KK graviton produced through gluon fusion and forced to decay to a pair
of Higgs bosons with the parameters reported in Ref. [25]. Bulk graviton and
radion signal events are simulated with masses in the range 260–1200and widths
of 1(narrow-width approximation), using the 2.3.3 [26] event generator at
leading order (LO). The resonance is forced to decay into a pair of Higgs
bosons which in turn decay into . The parton distribution function (PDF) set
NNPDF3.0 [27] with LO accuracy is used. The showering and hadronization of
partons are simulated with 8.212 [28].

During the 2016 data-taking period the average number of $\Pp\Pp$ interactions
per bunch crossing was approximately 23. The simulated samples include these
additional $\Pp\Pp$ interactions, referred to as pileup interactions (or
pileup), that overlap with the event of interest in the same bunch crossing.
Simulated events are weighted to match the number of $\Pp\Pp$ interactions per
event in data.

##  0.3 Event reconstruction

The particle-flow (PF) algorithm [29] is used to reconstruct and identify
individual particle in an event with an optimized combination of information
from the various elements of the CMS detector. The algorithm identifies each
reconstructed particle (PF candidate) as an electron, a muon, a photon, or a
charged or neutral hadron.

The reconstructed vertex with the largest value of summed physics-object
transverse momentum squared ($\pt^{2}$) is taken to be the primary $\Pp\Pp$
interaction vertex. The physics objects are the jets, clustered using the jet
finding algorithm [30, 31] with the tracks assigned to the vertex as inputs,
and the associated missing transverse momentum, taken as the negative vector
sum of the of those jets. This vertex is used for all the objects in the event
reconstructed with the PF algorithm.

Jets are reconstructed from PF candidates using the anti-clustering algorithm
[30], with a distance parameter of 0.4, as implemented in the package [31,
32]. Jet identification criteria are also applied to reject jets originating
from detector noise. The average neutral energy density from pileup
interactions is evaluated from PF objects and subtracted from the
reconstructed jets [33]. Jet energy corrections are derived from the
simulation, and are confirmed with in situ measurements of the energy balance
in dijet and photon+jet events [34].

Jets are identified as originating from $\cPqb$ quarks (“$\cPqb$ jets”) using
the DeepCSV [35] discriminator, a new tagging algorithm based on a deep neural
network with four hidden layers [36]. The DeepCSV discriminator employs the
same set of observables as those used by the combined secondary vertex (CSV)
algorithm [37, 35], except that the track selection is expanded to include up
to six tracks, further improving the jet identification. The operating point
chosen corresponds to a 1 (12)% rate for misidentifying a light-flavor
(-flavor) jet as a jet. The tagging efficiency for jets with $\pt$ in the
30–150range is approximately 69% and gradually decreases for lower and higher
jet [35].

##  0.4 Event selection

The search for a narrow-width $\mathrm{X}\to\PH(\bbbar)\PH(\bbbar)$ resonance
is performed for mass values in the 260–1200range. The angular distributions
for the decay products of such a resonance vary substantially over this range.
In order to increase the sensitivity of this search, different criteria are
used for events in two distinct mass regions: the low-mass region (LMR), for
resonance masses from 260 to 620, and the medium-mass region (MMR), for masses
from 550 to 1200. The boundary between the LMR and the MMR is at 580. It has
been chosen by optimizing for the expected sensitivity and takes into account
the uncertainties associated with the background modeling. The mass range
above 1200(high-mass region) is not covered by this search. Above 900, the
Higgs bosons have a momentum considerably higher than their mass and the Higgs
to decays are reconstructed more efficiently as single hadronic jets with a
larger anti-distance parameter (0.8) [38].

Events are selected online by combining two different trigger selections to
identify jets, both using the CSV algorithm. For the first trigger selection,
four jets with $\pt>30\GeV$ and $\abs{\eta}<2.4$ are required. The latter
requirement ensures that the jet lies within the tracker acceptance. Of those
four jets, two are required to have $\pt>90\GeV$ and at least three jets are
required to be tagged as jets. The second trigger selection requires four jets
with $\pt>45\GeV$ and at least three of those jets identified as jets.

Events are selected offline by requiring at least four tagged jets with
$\pt>30\GeV$ and $\abs{\eta}<2.4$. The selected jets are combined randomly
into pairs to form two Higgs boson candidates with masses $m_{\PH_{1}}$ and
$m_{\PH_{2}}$. For the LMR, $\PH\PH$ candidates are chosen from the four
selected jets such that $\abs{m_{\PH}-120\GeV}<40\GeV$ for each candidate
Higgs boson. For the MMR the candidates are selected using $\Delta
R=\sqrt{\smash[b]{(\Delta\eta)^{2}+(\Delta\phi)^{2}}}$ less than 1.5, where
$\Delta\eta$ and $\Delta\phi$ are the differences in the pseudorapidities and
azimuthal angles (in radians) of the two jets.

In the two-dimensional space defined by the reconstructed masses of the two
Higgs boson candidates, ${\PH_{1}}$ and $\PH_{2}$, a circular signal region
(SR) is defined with $\mathcal{R}<1$, where $\mathcal{R}$ is defined as:

$\mathcal{R}=\sqrt{\left(\frac{m_{\PH_{1}}-\mathcal{M}}{r}\right)^{2}+\left(\frac{m_{\PH_{2}}-\mathcal{M}}{r}\right)^{2}}$
(1)

The central mass value ($\mathcal{M}$) is the average of the means of the
$m_{\PH_{1}}$ and $m_{\PH_{2}}$ distributions for simulated signal events and
the parameter $r$ is set to 20. The centers of these circular regions have
been determined separately for the LMR and MMR and found to be 120 and 125,
respectively. If there are multiple $\PH\PH$ candidates in an event, the
combination that minimizes $\mathcal{R}^{2}$ is used.

After these event selection criteria are applied, the dijet invariant mass
resolution for $m_{\PH_{1}}$ and $m_{\PH_{2}}$ is approximately 10–13%,
depending on the of the reconstructed Higgs boson, with a few percent shift in
the value of the mass peak, relative to 125. The Higgs boson mass resolution
is further improved by applying multivariate regression techniques similar to
those used in the searches for SM Higgs bosons decaying to in CMS [39, 40].
The regression estimates a correction that is applied after the standard CMS
jet energy corrections [41, 34], and it is computed for individual jets to
improve the accuracy of the measured energy with respect to the quark energy.
To this end, a specialized boosted decision tree [42] is trained on simulated
$\cPqb$ jets from events, with inputs that include observables related to the
jet structure and tagging information. The average improvement in the Higgs
boson mass resolution, measured with simulated signal samples, is 6–12%,
depending on the of the reconstructed Higgs boson. The use of the regression
technique increases the sensitivity of the analysis by 5–20% depending on the
mass hypothesis. The regression technique is validated with data samples of
$\cPZ\to(\Pe\Pe,\mu\mu)$ events with two tagged jets and in $\ttbar$-enriched
samples [39]. The cumulative selection efficiencies of the selection criteria
described above for the graviton and radion signal benchmarks are reported in
Fig. 1.

The reconstructed resonance mass ($m_{\mathrm{X}}$), computed as the invariant
mass of $\PH_{1}$ and $\PH_{2}$, is displayed for simulated signal events with
different mass hypotheses in Fig. 2. In order to improve the resolution for
the resonance mass, the momenta of the reconstructed $\cPqb$ quarks are
corrected by constraining the invariant mass of the Higgs boson candidates to
be 125. Since jet direction is reconstructed with better resolution than jet ,
this constraint mainly benefits the latter. The improvement in resolution for
the reconstructed signal resonance ranges from 20 to 40% depending on the mass
hypothesis, resulting in an improvement of the sensitivity by 10–20%. The
shift in the reconstructed $m_{\mathrm{X}}$, due to these corrections is also
shown in Fig. 2. The mass shift is linear in $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ and is caused by
the asymmetry of the corrections due to the jet momentum resolution across the
range considered.

Figure 1: The selection efficiency for simulated
$\mathrm{X}\to\PH(\bbbar)\PH(\bbbar)$ events for a spin-0 radion (left) and a
spin-2 bulk KK-graviton (right), at different stages of the event selection
for each mass hypothesis, for the low-mass region (solid) and the medium-mass
region (dashed). The vertical line at 580corresponds to the transition between
the LMR and MMR regions.  Figure 2: The $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution for
simulated signal events (spin-2 bulk KK-graviton) after the event selection
criteria for the 450, 750, and 1000mass hypotheses, with and without the
correction obtained by constraining $m_{\PH}$ (kinematic constraint) and the
specific jet energy corrections (regression). The distributions are normalized
so that the area under the curve for each mass is the same

##  0.5 Signal and background modeling

To search for signal events with various mass hypotheses we fit the
$m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution for data events in the SR to the sum of two
parametric models, one for the signal and one for the SM background, which is
dominated by multijet production. This procedure is performed independently in
three regions: two within the LMR, as described below, and the MMR. Quantum
interference between the signal and non-resonant SM background processes is
neglected.

The parametric signal models are built by fitting the $m_{\mathrm{X}}$
distributions obtained from simulated signal events. The shape of the signal
$m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution is different for the LMR and the MMR, as a
result of the different event selection criteria. In the LMR, a sum of two
Gaussian functions is used, to account for the effect of reconstructing the
two Higgs boson candidates using jets not originating from their decays. This
occurs in about 30% of the events for the lowest resonance mass hypothesis,
decreasing to about 5% at the highest resonance mass hypothesis. Five
parameters are required, the mean and width of the two Gaussian functions and
the ratio of their integrals. In the MMR, the signal is modeled with a
function that has a Gaussian core smoothly extended on both sides via
exponential tails. This requires two parameters for the mean and width of the
Gaussian function, and two parameters for the exponential tails [15].

The parametric function used to model the background $m_{\mathrm{X}}$
distribution is obtained from control regions in data in which events are
expected to have kinematic properties similar to events in the SR. These
control regions are: (i) sideband regions (SB) defined as $1<\mathcal{R}<2$
and $(m_{\PH_{1}}-\mathcal{M})(m_{\PH_{2}}-\mathcal{M})<0$ in the
$m_{\PH_{1}}-m_{\PH_{2}}$ plane (as shown in Fig. 3), and (ii) events in the
SR and both SB regions that do not qualify as signal events due to a
requirement that one of the four jets used to reconstruct $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ is
not identified as a jet (anti-tag selection). For the LMR selection, the
$m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distributions in all control regions exhibit a kinematic
turn-on, due to the trigger requirements, followed by a smoothly falling
distribution at the larger $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ values. The $m_{\mathrm{X}}$
distributions in all control regions for the MMR selection exhibit a similar
smoothly falling shape with increasing $m_{\mathrm{X}}$. This feature allows
the adoption of a common form of the parametric background model in the SR and
control regions. The parameters of the background model are determined by the
fit used to extract a possible signal. In the following we describe the
derivation of the background model from the different control regions. For the
LMR, it is difficult to model simultaneously the turn-on and the tail of the
$m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution. Thus, the modeling of the background is split
into two ranges, LMR1 and LMR2, with two different parametric models to
accommodate either a turn-on shape or a falling distribution, respectively.

Figure 3: Definition of the SR and the SB in the ($m_{\PH_{1}}$,
$m_{\PH_{2}}$) plane used to motivate and validate the parametric model for
the multijet background. The quantities $m_{\PH_{1}}$ and $m_{\PH_{2}}$ are
the two reconstructed Higgs boson masses after applying the multivariate
regression described in Section 0.4. Data corresponds to a selection in the
MMR.

An indirect method of determining the boundary between LMR1 and LMR2 is used
to avoid revealing the $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution in the SR before fitting
for a possible signal. The method uses two selections in the SR and SB, as
described in Table 0.5. For the background, the shape of the $m_{\mathrm{X}}$
distribution in the SR (A) is predicted from the shape of the $m_{\mathrm{X}}$
distribution in the SR using the anti-tag selection (C) but reshaped by the
ratio, as a function of $m_{\mathrm{X}}$, between the $m_{\mathrm{X}}$
distribution in the SB with the nominal selection (B) and the $m_{\mathrm{X}}$
distribution in the SB with the anti-tag selection (D), so that
$\mathrm{A^{\prime}=C{B}/{D}}$. To test the validity of this method, new SR
and SB regions, centered at 150, are defined along the diagonal in Fig. 3 in a
similar fashion to those centered at 120. In that case the prediction
$\mathrm{E^{\prime}=G{F}/{H}}$ for the $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution in the SR
region centered at 150can be tested by directly comparing to the
$m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution in that region. Figure 4 shows the agreement
between this prediction and the observed distribution, validating the use of
this method for the SR distribution centered at 120. The boundary between LMR1
and LMR2 is then set at $m_{\mathrm{X}}=310$, by optimizing for the expected
sensitivity.

The signal and background are evaluated independently in
LMR1$=\left[260,310\right]$, LMR2$=\left[310,580\right]$and the
MMR$=\left[580,1200\right]$. For LMR1, a function with a Gaussian core
smoothly extended to an exponential tail on the high side is fitted to the
$m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution [15], while the function defined in Ref. [43]
Eq. (9) is used in LMR2 and the MMR. This function was originally used to
describe a Compton spectrum and has three free parameters describing the mean,
width and extent of the right side tail. In each case, the goodness of the
fit, characterized by the $\chi^{2}$ per degree of freedom, is found to be
reasonable. The fit of the background model on the SB for the MMR is shown in
Fig 5.

In the absence of a theoretical prediction for the background model, an
alternative one based on the Crystal Ball function [44] has been studied, and
the difference between them drives the assessment of a systematic uncertainty
due to the choice of the particular model. Pseudo-datasets are generated from
the alternative function and fitted with the nominal functions to compute
biases in the reconstructed signal strength. This procedure is performed for
each mass hypothesis and the corresponding biases range between 30–80fb for
the LMR, and 0.1–4fb for the MMR.

The SM top quark pair production in the SR is estimated from simulation to
contribute up to 10 and 15% of the selected events in the LMR and the MMR,
respectively. Since the $\ttbar$ contribution to the background exhibits a
shape very similar to that for the multijet process, it is implicitly included
in the data driven estimate.

Definitions of the control regions we used to test the functional form as
described in the text.  $\mathcal{M}={120}\GeV$ $\mathcal{M}=150\GeV$ SR SB SR
SB 4 tagged jets A B E F anti-tag C D G H

Figure 4: The predicted $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution in data for the LMR
(squares) and the observed distribution in a SR (circles) centered at a Higgs
boson mass of 150. Figure 5: The mX distribution in the SB of the MMR and the
fit to the background multijet shape are shown. The shaded regions correspond
to variations of $\pm$1 and $\pm$2 standard deviation (s.d.) in this
parametrized form. Here $n$ is the number of degrees of freedom in each fit.
The lower panel shows the difference between the data and the fits, divided by
the uncertainty in the number of data events.

##  0.6 Systematic uncertainties

Sources of systematic uncertainties that affect the signal yields are listed
in Table 0.6. The signal yield for a given production cross section is
affected by a 2.5% systematic uncertainty in the measurement of the integrated
luminosity at CMS [45]. The uncertainty in the signal normalization caused by
the choice of the PDF set [46] contributes up to 3.5%. The jet energy scale
[41, 34] is varied within one standard deviation as a function of jet and
$\eta$, and the efficiency of the selection criteria recomputed. The signal
efficiencies are found to vary by up to 2.9%. The effect of the uncertainty in
the jet energy resolution [41, 34] is evaluated by smearing the jet energies
according to the measured uncertainty. This causes variations in the signal
efficiency of between 0.9 and 2.1%. The trigger efficiency is evaluated in a
$\ttbar$-enriched control sample in which an isolated muon is required in
addition to the four tagged jets with $\pt>30\GeV$ and $\abs{\eta}<2.4$
demanded in the analysis. The efficiency of each online kinematic and tagging
requirement is evaluated separately and then the efficiency of all the trigger
selection criteria is computed in terms of conditional probability. The
associated systematic uncertainties are found to impact signal efficiencies at
the level of 5–9%. Signal yields are corrected to match the tagging efficiency
measured in data [35]. The associated uncertainty is evaluated to be about
6–8%.

The systematic uncertainty associated with the choice of the parametric
background model is evaluated as described in Section 0.5. We account for the
bias as a signal-shaped systematic uncertainty in the background model with
normalization centered at zero and a Gaussian uncertainty with standard
deviation equal to the bias. The impact on the expected limit ranges between
0.3–1.5%.

Impact of systematic uncertainties on the signal efficiencies in the LMR and
the MMR.  Source of Impact in LMR (%) Impact in MMR (%) systematic uncertainty
Signal Signal Luminosity 2.5 2.5 Jet energy scale 0.2–1.8 0.9–2.9 Jet energy
resolution 0.9–2.1 1.0–1.5 tagging scale factor 6.5–6.9 6.9–8.6 Trigger
efficiency 6.4–9.0 5.3–7.0 PDF 1.5–2.2 2.1–3.5

##  0.7 Results

Figure 6: The $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distributions for LMR1 (left) and LMR2 (right)
in the SR. These distributions are fitted in the two ranges to the reference
model. A fit to the background-only hypothesis, multijets, is shown. The
shaded regions correspond to variations of $\pm$1 and $\pm$2 standard
deviation (s.d.) in the parametrized form. Here $n$ is the number of degrees
of freedom in each fit. The lower panels show the difference between the data
and the fits, divided by the uncertainty in the number of data events.  Figure
7: The $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution for the multijet background in the SR in
data for the MMR. A fit to the background-only hypothesis, which consists of
the multijet shape, is shown. The shaded regions correspond to variations of
$\pm$1 and $\pm$2 standard deviation (s.d.) in this parametrized form. Here
$n$ is the number of degrees of freedom in each fit. The lower panel shows the
difference between the data and the fits, divided by the uncertainty in the
number of data events. Figure 8: The observed and expected upper limits on the
cross section for a spin-2 resonance $\mathrm{X}\to\PH(\bbbar)\PH(\bbbar)$ at
95% , using the asymptotic method. The theoretical cross section for the bulk
KK-graviton, with $\kappa/\Mpl=0.5$ and $\kappa l=35$, decaying to four jets
via Higgs bosons is overlaid. The transition between the LMR and the MMR is
based on the expected sensitivity, resulting in the observed discontinuity.
Figure 9: The observed and expected upper limits on the cross section for a
spin-0 resonance $\mathrm{X}\to\PH(\bbbar)\PH(\bbbar)$ at 95% , using the
asymptotic method. The theoretical cross section for the production of a
radion, with $\Lambda=3\TeV$, $\kappa l=35$, and no radion-Higgs boson mixing,
decaying to four jets via Higgs bosons is overlaid. The transition between the
LMR and the MMR is based on the expected sensitivity, resulting in the
observed discontinuity.

The $m_{\mathrm{X}}$ distribution for data in the SR and results of the fit to
the parametric background model are shown in Figs. 6, for the LMR1 and the
LMR2, and 7 for the MMR. Parameters controlling the shapes and yields of the
signal are allowed to float within ranges determined by the systematic
uncertainties. The parameters and normalization of the multijet background
shape are left to float freely in the fit. The shapes of the background-only
fit are found to adequately describe the data in each of the search region.

The observed and expected upper limits on the cross section times branching
fraction for $\Pp\Pp\to\mathrm{X}\to\PH(\bbbar)\PH(\bbbar)$ at 95% confidence
level () are computed using the modified frequentist method [47, 48, 49, 50].
These limits are shown in Figs. 8 and 9 for spin-2 and spin-0 hypotheses,
respectively. The green and yellow bands represent the $\pm$1 and $\pm$2
standard deviation confidence intervals around the expected limits. The
observed limits in these figures exhibit several deviations from the expected
one beyond $\pm 2$ standard deviation. The local $p$-value of the most
significant excess (deficit) is 2.6 ($-3.6$) standard deviation. In order to
estimate the global significance of these deviations within the search range,
we estimated, based on pseudo-experiments, a global probability to see three
(four) positive or negative deviations from the expected limits consistent
with narrow positive or negative signal contributions with the square sum of
the significances exceeding 5.1 (5.6) standard deviation, as observed in data.
In both cases, the global probability was found to be in a percent range,
consistent with a statistical nature of the observed deviations. In Fig. 8,
the NLO theoretical cross section for the gluon fusion production of a bulk
KK-graviton with $\kappa l$ and $\kappa$ set to 35 and $0.5\Mpl$ respectively
is shown. This KK-graviton is excluded at 95% in the mass ranges of 320–450
and 480–720. In Fig. 9, the NLO theoretical cross section for the gluon fusion
production of a radion with decay constant $\Lambda=3\TeV$ is shown. Such a
radion is excluded at 95% in the mass ranges of 260–280, 300–450, and
480–1120.

##  0.8 Summary

A search for a narrow-width resonance decaying into two Higgs bosons, each
decaying into a bottom quark-antiquark pair, is presented. The search is
performed using proton-proton collision data corresponding to an integrated
luminosity of 35.9at $\sqrt{s}=13$recorded by the CMS detector at the LHC. No
evidence for a signal is observed and upper limits at 95% confidence level on
the production cross section for spin-0 and spin-2 resonances in the mass
range from 260 to 1200are set. These cross-section limits are translated into
an exclusion at 95% confidence level of a bulk KK-graviton (with $\kappa l$ =
35 and $\kappa=0.5\Mpl$) in the mass ranges of 320–450and 480–720. The
corresponding excluded mass ranges for a radion (with decay constant
$\Lambda=3\TeV$) are 260–280, 300–450and 480–1120. This analysis outperforms a
similar search by CMS using 17.9collected at 8 [15] and extends the
sensitivity to the gluon fusion production of a radion with decay constant
$\Lambda=3\TeV$ and to bulk graviton with $\kappa$ set to $0.5\Mpl$.

###### Acknowledgements.

We congratulate our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments for the
excellent performance of the LHC and thank the technical and administrative
staffs at CERN and at other CMS institutes for their contributions to the
success of the CMS effort. In addition, we gratefully acknowledge the
computing centres and personnel of the Worldwide LHC Computing Grid for
delivering so effectively the computing infrastructure essential to our
analyses. Finally, we acknowledge the enduring support for the construction
and operation of the LHC and the CMS detector provided by the following
funding agencies: BMWFW and FWF (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq,
CAPES, FAPERJ, FAPERGS, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST,
and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES and CSF (Croatia); RPF
(Cyprus); SENESCYT (Ecuador); MoER, ERC IUT, and ERDF (Estonia); Academy of
Finland, MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and
HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); NKFIA (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM
(Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); MSIP and NRF (Republic of Korea); LAS
(Lithuania); MOE and UM (Malaysia); BUAP, CINVESTAV, CONACYT, LNS, SEP, and
UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MBIE (New Zealand); PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC
(Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Dubna); MON, RosAtom, RAS, RFBR, and NRC KI
(Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI, CPAN, PCTI, and FEDER (Spain); Swiss Funding
Agencies (Switzerland); MST (Taipei); ThEPCenter, IPST, STAR, and NSTDA
(Thailand); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); NASU and SFFR (Ukraine); STFC (United
Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA). Individuals have received support from the Marie-
Curie programme and the European Research Council and Horizon 2020 Grant,
contract No. 675440 (European Union); the Leventis Foundation; the A. P. Sloan
Foundation; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; the Belgian Federal Science
Policy Office; the Fonds pour la Formation à la Recherche dans l’Industrie et
dans l’Agriculture (FRIA-Belgium); the Agentschap voor Innovatie door
Wetenschap en Technologie (IWT-Belgium); the F.R.S.-FNRS and FWO (Belgium)
under the “Excellence of Science - EOS” - be.h project n. 30820817; the
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic; the
Lendület (“Momentum”) Programme and the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of
the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the New National Excellence Program ÚNKP,
the NKFIA research grants 123842, 123959, 124845, 124850 and 125105 (Hungary);
the Council of Science and Industrial Research, India; the HOMING PLUS
programme of the Foundation for Polish Science, cofinanced from European
Union, Regional Development Fund, the Mobility Plus programme of the Ministry
of Science and Higher Education, the National Science Center (Poland),
contracts Harmonia 2014/14/M/ST2/00428, Opus 2014/13/B/ST2/02543,
2014/15/B/ST2/03998, and 2015/19/B/ST2/02861, Sonata-bis 2012/07/E/ST2/01406;
the National Priorities Research Program by Qatar National Research Fund; the
Programa Estatal de Fomento de la Investigación Científica y Técnica de
Excelencia María de Maeztu, grant MDM-2015-0509 and the Programa Severo Ochoa
del Principado de Asturias; the Thalis and Aristeia programmes cofinanced by
EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; the Rachadapisek Sompot Fund for Postdoctoral
Fellowship, Chulalongkorn University and the Chulalongkorn Academic into Its
2nd Century Project Advancement Project (Thailand); the Welch Foundation,
contract C-1845; and the Weston Havens Foundation (USA).

## References

  * [1] ATLAS Collaboration, “Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC”,  Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1, 10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020, arXiv:1207.7214.
  * [2] CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC”,  Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30, 10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021, arXiv:1207.7235.
  * [3] CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 and 8 TeV”,  JHEP 06 (2013) 081, 10.1007/JHEP06(2013)081, arXiv:1303.4571.
  * [4] ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, “Combined measurement of the Higgs boson mass in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ and 8 TeV with the ATLAS and CMS experiments”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 191803, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803, arXiv:1503.07589.
  * [5] CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of properties of the Higgs boson decaying into the four-lepton final state in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  JHEP 11 (2017) 047, 10.1007/JHEP11(2017)047, arXiv:1706.09936.
  * [6] L. Randall and R. Sundrum, “Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 3370, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.3370, arXiv:hep-ph/9905221.
  * [7] W. D. Goldberger and M. B. Wise, “Modulus stabilization with bulk fields”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 4922, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.4922, arXiv:hep-ph/9907447.
  * [8] O. DeWolfe, D. Z. Freedman, S. S. Gubser, and A. Karch, “Modeling the fifth dimension with scalars and gravity”,  Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 046008, 10.1103/PhysRevD.62.046008, arXiv:hep-th/9909134.
  * [9] C. Csáki, M. Graesser, L. Randall, and J. Terning, “Cosmology of brane models with radion stabilization”,  Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 045015, 10.1103/PhysRevD.62.045015, arXiv:hep-ph/9911406.
  * [10] H. Davoudiasl, J. L. Hewett, and T. G. Rizzo, “Phenomenology of the Randall-Sundrum gauge hierarchy model”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 2080, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.2080, arXiv:hep-ph/9909255.
  * [11] C. Csáki, M. L. Graesser, and G. D. Kribs, “Radion dynamics and electroweak physics”,  Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 065002, 10.1103/PhysRevD.63.065002, arXiv:hep-th/0008151.
  * [12] K. Agashe, H. Davoudiasl, G. Perez, and A. Soni, “Warped gravitons at the LHC and beyond”,  Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 036006, 10.1103/PhysRevD.76.036006, arXiv:hep-ph/0701186.
  * [13] G. F. Giudice, R. Rattazzi, and J. D. Wells, “Graviscalars from higher dimensional metrics and curvature Higgs mixing”,  Nucl. Phys. B 595 (2001) 250, 10.1016/S0550-3213(00)00686-6, arXiv:hep-ph/0002178.
  * [14] A. Oliveira, “Gravity particles from warped extra dimensions, predictions for LHC”, (2014). arXiv:1404.0102.
  * [15] CMS Collaboration, “Search for resonant pair production of Higgs bosons decaying to two bottom quark-antiquark pairs in proton-proton collisions at 8 TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 749 (2015) 560, 10.1016/j.physletb.2015.08.047, arXiv:1503.04114.
  * [16] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for Higgs boson pair production in the $\bbbar\bbbar$ final state from pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV with the ATLAS detector”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 412, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3628-x, arXiv:1506.00285.
  * [17] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for pair production of Higgs bosons in the $\bbbar\bbbar$ final state using proton–proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector”,  Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 052002, 10.1103/PhysRevD.94.052002, arXiv:1606.04782.
  * [18] CMS Collaboration, “Search for Higgs boson pair production in events with two bottom quarks and two tau leptons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 778 (2018) 101, 10.1016/j.physletb.2018.01.001, arXiv:1707.02909.
  * [19] CMS Collaboration, “Search for two Higgs bosons in final states containing two photons and two bottom quarks in proton-proton collisions at 8 TeV”,  Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 052012, 10.1103/PhysRevD.94.052012, arXiv:1603.06896.
  * [20] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for Higgs boson pair production in the $\gamma\gamma\bbbar$ final state using $\Pp\Pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV from the ATLAS detector”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 081802, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.081802, arXiv:1406.5053.
  * [21] ATLAS Collaboration, “Searches for Higgs boson pair production in the $hh\to\bbbar\tau\tau,\gamma\gamma WW^{*},\gamma\gamma\bbbar,\bbbar\bbbar$ channels with the ATLAS detector”,  Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 092004, 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.092004, arXiv:1509.04670.
  * [22] CMS Collaboration, “Search for resonant and nonresonant Higgs boson pair production in the $\bbbar l\nu l\nu$ final state in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$13 TeV”,  JHEP 01 (2018) 054, 10.1007/JHEP01(2018)054, arXiv:1708.04188.
  * [23] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,  JINST 3 (2008) S08004, 10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004.
  * [24] GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4 — a simulation toolkit”,  Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506 (2003) 250, 10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8.
  * [25] M. Gouzevitch et al., “Scale-invariant resonance tagging in multijet events and new physics in Higgs pair production”,  JHEP 07 (2013) 148, 10.1007/JHEP07(2013)148, arXiv:1303.6636.
  * [26] 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, 10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079, arXiv:1405.0301.
  * [27] NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”,  JHEP 04 (2015) 040, 10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040, arXiv:1410.8849.
  * [28] T. Sjöstrand et al., “An Introduction to PYTHIA 8.2”,  Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159, 10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024, arXiv:1410.3012.
  * [29] CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector”,  JINST 12 (2017) P10003, 10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003, arXiv:1706.04965.
  * [30] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “The Anti-jet clustering algorithm”,  JHEP 04 (2008) 063, 10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063, arXiv:0802.1189.
  * [31] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet User Manual”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 1896, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2, arXiv:1111.6097.
  * [32] M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam, “Dispelling the $N^{3}$ myth for the $k_{t}$ jet-finder”,  Phys. Lett. B 641 (2006) 57, 10.1016/j.physletb.2006.08.037, arXiv:hep-ph/0512210.
  * [33] M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam, “Pileup subtraction using jet areas”,  Phys. Lett. B 659 (2008) 119, 10.1016/j.physletb.2007.09.077, arXiv:0707.1378.
  * [34] CMS Collaboration, “Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV”,  JINST 12 (2017) P02014, 10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014, arXiv:1607.03663.
  * [35] CMS Collaboration, “Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV”,  JINST 13 (2018) P05011, 10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/P05011, arXiv:1712.07158.
  * [36] D. Guest et al., “Jet flavor classification in high-energy physics with deep neural networks”,  Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 112002, 10.1103/PhysRevD.94.112002, arXiv:1607.08633.
  * [37] CMS Collaboration, “Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment”,  JINST 8 (2013) P04013, 10.1088/1748-0221/8/04/P04013, arXiv:1211.4462.
  * [38] CMS Collaboration, “Search for a massive resonance decaying to a pair of Higgs bosons in the four b quark final state in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 781 (2018) 244, 10.1016/j.physletb.2018.03.084, arXiv:1710.04960.
  * [39] CMS Collaboration, “Search for the standard model Higgs boson produced in association with a W or a Z boson and decaying to bottom quarks”,  Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 012003, 10.1103/PhysRevD.89.012003, arXiv:1310.3687.
  * [40] CMS Collaboration, “Search for the standard model Higgs boson produced through vector boson fusion and decaying to $b\overline{b}$”,  Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 032008, 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.032008, arXiv:1506.01010.
  * [41] CMS Collaboration, “Determination of jet energy calibration and transverse momentum resolution in CMS”,  JINST 6 (2011) 11002, 10.1088/1748-0221/6/11/P11002, arXiv:1107.4277.
  * [42] H. Voss, A. Höcker, J. Stelzer, and F. Tegenfeldt, “TMVA, the toolkit for multivariate data analysis with ROOT”, in  XIth International Workshop on Advanced Computing and Analysis Techniques in Physics Research (ACAT), p. 40.  2007\.  arXiv:physics/0703039.
  * [43] Belle Collaboration, “A detailed test of the CsI(Tl) calorimeter for BELLE with photon beams of energy between 20-MeV and 5.4-GeV”,  Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 441 (2000) 401, 10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00992-4.
  * [44] M. J. Oreglia, “A study of the reactions $\psi^{\prime}\to\gamma\gamma\psi$”.  PhD thesis, Stanford University, 1980.  SLAC Report SLAC-R-236.
  * [45] CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurements for the 2016 data taking period”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001, 2017.
  * [46] J. Butterworth et al., “PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II”,  J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 023001, 10.1088/0954-3899/43/2/023001, arXiv:1510.03865.
  * [47] G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, “Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1554, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0, arXiv:1007.1727. [Erratum: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2501-z].
  * [48] T. Junk, “Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics”,  Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 434 (1999) 435, 10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00498-2, arXiv:hep-ex/9902006.
  * [49] A. L. Read, “Presentation of search results: the CLs technique”,  J. Phys. G 28 (2002) 2693, 10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313.
  * [50] The ATLAS Collaboration, The CMS Collaboration, The LHC Higgs Combination Group, “Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011”, Technical Report CMS-NOTE-2011-005. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-11, 2011.

##  .9 The CMS Collaboration

Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia
A.M. Sirunyan, A. Tumasyan Institut für Hochenergiephysik, Wien, Austria
W. Adam, F. Ambrogi, E. Asilar, T. Bergauer, J. Brandstetter, E. Brondolin, M.
Dragicevic, J. Erö, A. Escalante Del Valle, M. Flechl, M. Friedl, R.
Frühwirth1, V.M. Ghete, J. Grossmann, J. Hrubec, M. Jeitler1, A. König, N.
Krammer, I. Krätschmer, D. Liko, T. Madlener, I. Mikulec, E. Pree, N. Rad, H.
Rohringer, J. Schieck1, R. Schöfbeck, M. Spanring, D. Spitzbart, A. Taurok, W.
Waltenberger, J. Wittmann, C.-E. Wulz1, M. Zarucki Institute for Nuclear
Problems, Minsk, Belarus
V. Chekhovsky, V. Mossolov, J. Suarez Gonzalez Universiteit Antwerpen,
Antwerpen, Belgium
E.A. De Wolf, D. Di Croce, X. Janssen, J. Lauwers, M. Pieters, M. Van De
Klundert, H. Van Haevermaet, P. Van Mechelen, N. Van Remortel Vrije
Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
S. Abu Zeid, F. Blekman, J. D’Hondt, I. De Bruyn, J. De Clercq, K. Deroover,
G. Flouris, D. Lontkovskyi, S. Lowette, I. Marchesini, S. Moortgat, L.
Moreels, Q. Python, K. Skovpen, S. Tavernier, W. Van Doninck, P. Van Mulders,
I. Van Parijs Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
D. Beghin, B. Bilin, H. Brun, B. Clerbaux, G. De Lentdecker, H. Delannoy, B.
Dorney, G. Fasanella, L. Favart, R. Goldouzian, A. Grebenyuk, A.K. Kalsi, T.
Lenzi, J. Luetic, T. Seva, E. Starling, C. Vander Velde, P. Vanlaer, D.
Vannerom, R. Yonamine Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
T. Cornelis, D. Dobur, A. Fagot, M. Gul, I. Khvastunov2, D. Poyraz, C. Roskas,
D. Trocino, M. Tytgat, W. Verbeke, B. Vermassen, M. Vit, N. Zaganidis
Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
H. Bakhshiansohi, O. Bondu, S. Brochet, G. Bruno, C. Caputo, A. Caudron, P.
David, S. De Visscher, C. Delaere, M. Delcourt, B. Francois, A. Giammanco, G.
Krintiras, V. Lemaitre, A. Magitteri, A. Mertens, M. Musich, K. Piotrzkowski,
L. Quertenmont, A. Saggio, M. Vidal Marono, S. Wertz, J. Zobec Centro
Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
W.L. Aldá Júnior, F.L. Alves, G.A. Alves, L. Brito, G. Correia Silva, C.
Hensel, A. Moraes, M.E. Pol, P. Rebello Teles Universidade do Estado do Rio de
Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E. Belchior Batista Das Chagas, W. Carvalho, J. Chinellato3, E. Coelho, E.M.
Da Costa, G.G. Da Silveira4, D. De Jesus Damiao, S. Fonseca De Souza, H.
Malbouisson, M. Medina Jaime5, M. Melo De Almeida, C. Mora Herrera, L. Mundim,
H. Nogima, L.J. Sanchez Rosas, A. Santoro, A. Sznajder, M. Thiel, E.J. Tonelli
Manganote3, F. Torres Da Silva De Araujo, A. Vilela Pereira Universidade
Estadual Paulista a, Universidade Federal do ABC b, São Paulo, Brazil
S. Ahujaa, C.A. Bernardesa, L. Calligarisa, T.R. Fernandez Perez Tomeia, E.M.
Gregoresb, P.G. Mercadanteb, S.F. Novaesa, SandraS. Padulaa, D. Romero Abadb,
J.C. Ruiz Vargasa Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Bulgarian
Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Aleksandrov, R. Hadjiiska, P. Iaydjiev, A. Marinov, M. Misheva, M. Rodozov,
M. Shopova, G. Sultanov University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Dimitrov, L. Litov, B. Pavlov, P. Petkov Beihang University, Beijing, China
W. Fang6, X. Gao6, L. Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing, China
M. Ahmad, J.G. Bian, G.M. Chen, H.S. Chen, M. Chen, Y. Chen, C.H. Jiang, D.
Leggat, H. Liao, Z. Liu, F. Romeo, S.M. Shaheen, A. Spiezia, J. Tao, C. Wang,
Z. Wang, E. Yazgan, H. Zhang, J. Zhao State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics
and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y. Ban, G. Chen, J. Li, Q. Li, S. Liu, Y. Mao, S.J. Qian, D. Wang, Z. Xu
Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Y. Wang Universidad de Los Andes, Bogota, Colombia
C. Avila, A. Cabrera, C.A. Carrillo Montoya, L.F. Chaparro Sierra, C. Florez,
C.F. González Hernández, M.A. Segura Delgado University of Split, Faculty of
Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, Split,
Croatia
B. Courbon, N. Godinovic, D. Lelas, I. Puljak, P.M. Ribeiro Cipriano, T.
Sculac University of Split, Faculty of Science, Split, Croatia
Z. Antunovic, M. Kovac Institute Rudjer Boskovic, Zagreb, Croatia
V. Brigljevic, D. Ferencek, K. Kadija, B. Mesic, A. Starodumov7, T. Susa
University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
M.W. Ather, A. Attikis, G. Mavromanolakis, J. Mousa, C. Nicolaou, F. Ptochos,
P.A. Razis, H. Rykaczewski Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
M. Finger8, M. Finger Jr.8 Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador
E. Carrera Jarrin Academy of Scientific Research and Technology of the Arab
Republic of Egypt, Egyptian Network of High Energy Physics, Cairo, Egypt
A.A. Abdelalim9,10, A. Mohamed10, E. Salama11,12 National Institute of
Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Tallinn, Estonia
S. Bhowmik, R.K. Dewanjee, M. Kadastik, L. Perrini, M. Raidal, C. Veelken
Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
P. Eerola, H. Kirschenmann, J. Pekkanen, M. Voutilainen Helsinki Institute of
Physics, Helsinki, Finland
J. Havukainen, J.K. Heikkilä, T. Järvinen, V. Karimäki, R. Kinnunen, T.
Lampén, K. Lassila-Perini, S. Laurila, S. Lehti, T. Lindén, P. Luukka, T.
Mäenpää, H. Siikonen, E. Tuominen, J. Tuominiemi Lappeenranta University of
Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland
T. Tuuva IRFU, CEA, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
M. Besancon, F. Couderc, M. Dejardin, D. Denegri, J.L. Faure, F. Ferri, S.
Ganjour, S. Ghosh, A. Givernaud, P. Gras, G. Hamel de Monchenault, P. Jarry,
C. Leloup, E. Locci, M. Machet, J. Malcles, G. Negro, J. Rander, A. Rosowsky,
M.Ö. Sahin, M. Titov Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole polytechnique,
CNRS/IN2P3, Université Paris-Saclay, Palaiseau, France
A. Abdulsalam13, C. Amendola, I. Antropov, S. Baffioni, F. Beaudette, P.
Busson, L. Cadamuro, C. Charlot, R. Granier de Cassagnac, M. Jo, I. Kucher, S.
Lisniak, A. Lobanov, J. Martin Blanco, M. Nguyen, C. Ochando, G. Ortona, P.
Paganini, P. Pigard, R. Salerno, J.B. Sauvan, Y. Sirois, A.G. Stahl Leiton, Y.
Yilmaz, A. Zabi, A. Zghiche Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC UMR 7178,
Strasbourg, France
J.-L. Agram14, J. Andrea, D. Bloch, J.-M. Brom, E.C. Chabert, C. Collard, E.
Conte14, X. Coubez, F. Drouhin14, J.-C. Fontaine14, D. Gelé, U. Goerlach, M.
Jansová, P. Juillot, A.-C. Le Bihan, N. Tonon, P. Van Hove Centre de Calcul de
l’Institut National de Physique Nucleaire et de Physique des Particules,
CNRS/IN2P3, Villeurbanne, France
S. Gadrat Université de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS-IN2P3,
Institut de Physique Nucléaire de Lyon, Villeurbanne, France
S. Beauceron, C. Bernet, G. Boudoul, N. Chanon, R. Chierici, D. Contardo, P.
Depasse, H. El Mamouni, J. Fay, L. Finco, S. Gascon, M. Gouzevitch, G.
Grenier, B. Ille, F. Lagarde, I.B. Laktineh, H. Lattaud, M. Lethuillier, L.
Mirabito, A.L. Pequegnot, S. Perries, A. Popov15, V. Sordini, M. Vander
Donckt, S. Viret, S. Zhang Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
A. Khvedelidze8 Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
D. Lomidze RWTH Aachen University, I. Physikalisches Institut, Aachen, Germany
C. Autermann, L. Feld, M.K. Kiesel, K. Klein, M. Lipinski, M. Preuten, M.P.
Rauch, C. Schomakers, J. Schulz, M. Teroerde, B. Wittmer, V. Zhukov15 RWTH
Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, Germany
A. Albert, D. Duchardt, M. Endres, M. Erdmann, S. Erdweg, T. Esch, R. Fischer,
A. Güth, T. Hebbeker, C. Heidemann, K. Hoepfner, S. Knutzen, M. Merschmeyer,
A. Meyer, P. Millet, S. Mukherjee, T. Pook, M. Radziej, H. Reithler, M.
Rieger, F. Scheuch, D. Teyssier, S. Thüer RWTH Aachen University, III.
Physikalisches Institut B, Aachen, Germany
G. Flügge, B. Kargoll, T. Kress, A. Künsken, T. Müller, A. Nehrkorn, A.
Nowack, C. Pistone, O. Pooth, A. Stahl16 Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron,
Hamburg, Germany
M. Aldaya Martin, T. Arndt, C. Asawatangtrakuldee, K. Beernaert, O. Behnke, U.
Behrens, A. Bermúdez Martínez, A.A. Bin Anuar, K. Borras17, V. Botta, A.
Campbell, P. Connor, C. Contreras-Campana, F. Costanza, V. Danilov, A. De Wit,
C. Diez Pardos, D. Domínguez Damiani, G. Eckerlin, D. Eckstein, T. Eichhorn,
E. Eren, E. Gallo18, J. Garay Garcia, A. Geiser, J.M. Grados Luyando, A.
Grohsjean, P. Gunnellini, M. Guthoff, A. Harb, J. Hauk, M. Hempel19, H. Jung,
M. Kasemann, J. Keaveney, C. Kleinwort, J. Knolle, I. Korol, D. Krücker, W.
Lange, A. Lelek, T. Lenz, K. Lipka, W. Lohmann19, R. Mankel, I.-A. Melzer-
Pellmann, A.B. Meyer, M. Meyer, M. Missiroli, G. Mittag, J. Mnich, A.
Mussgiller, D. Pitzl, A. Raspereza, M. Savitskyi, P. Saxena, R. Shevchenko, N.
Stefaniuk, H. Tholen, G.P. Van Onsem, R. Walsh, Y. Wen, K. Wichmann, C.
Wissing, O. Zenaiev University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
R. Aggleton, S. Bein, V. Blobel, M. Centis Vignali, T. Dreyer, E. Garutti, D.
Gonzalez, J. Haller, A. Hinzmann, M. Hoffmann, A. Karavdina, G. Kasieczka, R.
Klanner, R. Kogler, N. Kovalchuk, S. Kurz, J. Lange, D. Marconi, J. Multhaup,
M. Niedziela, D. Nowatschin, T. Peiffer, A. Perieanu, A. Reimers, C. Scharf,
P. Schleper, A. Schmidt, S. Schumann, J. Schwandt, J. Sonneveld, H. Stadie, G.
Steinbrück, F.M. Stober, M. Stöver, D. Troendle, E. Usai, A. Vanhoefer, B.
Vormwald Karlsruher Institut fuer Technology
M. Akbiyik, C. Barth, M. Baselga, S. Baur, E. Butz, R. Caspart, T. Chwalek, F.
Colombo, W. De Boer, A. Dierlamm, N. Faltermann, B. Freund, R. Friese, M.
Giffels, M.A. Harrendorf, F. Hartmann16, S.M. Heindl, U. Husemann, F.
Kassel16, S. Kudella, H. Mildner, M.U. Mozer, Th. Müller, M. Plagge, G. Quast,
K. Rabbertz, M. Schröder, I. Shvetsov, G. Sieber, H.J. Simonis, R. Ulrich, S.
Wayand, M. Weber, T. Weiler, S. Williamson, C. Wöhrmann, R. Wolf Institute of
Nuclear and Particle Physics (INPP), NCSR Demokritos, Aghia Paraskevi, Greece
G. Anagnostou, G. Daskalakis, T. Geralis, A. Kyriakis, D. Loukas, I. Topsis-
Giotis National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
G. Karathanasis, S. Kesisoglou, A. Panagiotou, N. Saoulidou, E. Tziaferi
National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece
K. Kousouris, I. Papakrivopoulos University of Ioánnina, Ioánnina, Greece
I. Evangelou, C. Foudas, P. Gianneios, P. Katsoulis, P. Kokkas, S. Mallios, N.
Manthos, I. Papadopoulos, E. Paradas, J. Strologas, F.A. Triantis, D.
Tsitsonis MTA-ELTE Lendület CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, Eötvös
Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
M. Csanad, N. Filipovic, G. Pasztor, O. Surányi, G.I. Veres20 Wigner Research
Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
G. Bencze, C. Hajdu, D. Horvath21, Á. Hunyadi, F. Sikler, T.Á. Vámi, V.
Veszpremi, G. Vesztergombi20 Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen,
Hungary
N. Beni, S. Czellar, J. Karancsi22, A. Makovec, J. Molnar, Z. Szillasi
Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
M. Bartók20, P. Raics, Z.L. Trocsanyi, B. Ujvari Indian Institute of Science
(IISc), Bangalore, India
S. Choudhury, J.R. Komaragiri National Institute of Science Education and
Research, HBNI, Bhubaneswar, India
S. Bahinipati23, P. Mal, K. Mandal, A. Nayak24, D.K. Sahoo23, S.K. Swain
Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
S. Bansal, S.B. Beri, V. Bhatnagar, S. Chauhan, R. Chawla, N. Dhingra, R.
Gupta, A. Kaur, M. Kaur, S. Kaur, R. Kumar, P. Kumari, M. Lohan, A. Mehta, S.
Sharma, J.B. Singh, G. Walia University of Delhi, Delhi, India
A. Bhardwaj, B.C. Choudhary, R.B. Garg, S. Keshri, A. Kumar, Ashok Kumar, S.
Malhotra, M. Naimuddin, K. Ranjan, Aashaq Shah, R. Sharma Saha Institute of
Nuclear Physics, HBNI, Kolkata, India
R. Bhardwaj25, R. Bhattacharya, S. Bhattacharya, U. Bhawandeep25, D. Bhowmik,
S. Dey, S. Dutt25, S. Dutta, S. Ghosh, N. Majumdar, K. Mondal, S.
Mukhopadhyay, S. Nandan, A. Purohit, P.K. Rout, A. Roy, S. Roy Chowdhury, S.
Sarkar, M. Sharan, B. Singh, S. Thakur25 Indian Institute of Technology
Madras, Madras, India
P.K. Behera Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India
R. Chudasama, D. Dutta, V. Jha, V. Kumar, A.K. Mohanty16, P.K. Netrakanti,
L.M. Pant, P. Shukla, A. Topkar Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-A,
Mumbai, India
T. Aziz, S. Dugad, B. Mahakud, S. Mitra, G.B. Mohanty, N. Sur, B. Sutar Tata
Institute of Fundamental Research-B, Mumbai, India
S. Banerjee, S. Bhattacharya, S. Chatterjee, P. Das, M. Guchait, Sa. Jain, S.
Kumar, M. Maity26, G. Majumder, K. Mazumdar, N. Sahoo, T. Sarkar26, N.
Wickramage27 Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune,
India
S. Chauhan, S. Dube, V. Hegde, A. Kapoor, K. Kothekar, S. Pandey, A. Rane, S.
Sharma Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran
S. Chenarani28, E. Eskandari Tadavani, S.M. Etesami28, M. Khakzad, M.
Mohammadi Najafabadi, M. Naseri, S. Paktinat Mehdiabadi29, F. Rezaei
Hosseinabadi, B. Safarzadeh30, M. Zeinali University College Dublin, Dublin,
Ireland
M. Felcini, M. Grunewald INFN Sezione di Bari a, Università di Bari b,
Politecnico di Bari c, Bari, Italy
M. Abbresciaa,b, C. Calabriaa,b, A. Colaleoa, D. Creanzaa,c, L. Cristellaa,b,
N. De Filippisa,c, M. De Palmaa,b, A. Di Florioa,b, F. Erricoa,b, L. Fiorea,
A. Gelmia,b, G. Iasellia,c, S. Lezkia,b, G. Maggia,c, M. Maggia, B.
Marangellia,b, G. Minielloa,b, S. Mya,b, S. Nuzzoa,b, A. Pompilia,b, G.
Pugliesea,c, R. Radognaa, A. Ranieria, G. Selvaggia,b, A. Sharmaa, L.
Silvestrisa,16, R. Vendittia, P. Verwilligena, G. Zitoa INFN Sezione di
Bologna a, Università di Bologna b, Bologna, Italy
G. Abbiendia, C. Battilanaa,b, D. Bonacorsia,b, L. Borgonovia,b, S. Braibant-
Giacomellia,b, R. Campaninia,b, P. Capiluppia,b, A. Castroa,b, F.R. Cavalloa,
S.S. Chhibraa,b, G. Codispotia,b, M. Cuffiania,b, G.M. Dallavallea, F.
Fabbria, A. Fanfania,b, D. Fasanellaa,b, P. Giacomellia, C. Grandia, L.
Guiduccia,b, S. Marcellinia, G. Masettia, A. Montanaria, F.L. Navarriaa,b, F.
Odoricia, A. Perrottaa, A.M. Rossia,b, T. Rovellia,b, G.P. Sirolia,b, N. Tosia
INFN Sezione di Catania a, Università di Catania b, Catania, Italy
S. Albergoa,b, S. Costaa,b, A. Di Mattiaa, F. Giordanoa,b, R. Potenzaa,b, A.
Tricomia,b, C. Tuvea,b INFN Sezione di Firenze a, Università di Firenze b,
Firenze, Italy
G. Barbaglia, K. Chatterjeea,b, V. Ciullia,b, C. Civininia, R.
D’Alessandroa,b, E. Focardia,b, G. Latino, P. Lenzia,b, M. Meschinia, S.
Paolettia, L. Russoa,31, G. Sguazzonia, D. Stroma, L. Viliania INFN Laboratori
Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
L. Benussi, S. Bianco, F. Fabbri, D. Piccolo, F. Primavera16 INFN Sezione di
Genova a, Università di Genova b, Genova, Italy
V. Calvellia,b, F. Ferroa, F. Raveraa,b, E. Robuttia, S. Tosia,b INFN Sezione
di Milano-Bicocca a, Università di Milano-Bicocca b, Milano, Italy
A. Benagliaa, A. Beschib, L. Brianzaa,b, F. Brivioa,b, V. Cirioloa,b,16, M.E.
Dinardoa,b, S. Fiorendia,b, S. Gennaia, A. Ghezzia,b, P. Govonia,b, M.
Malbertia,b, S. Malvezzia, R.A. Manzonia,b, D. Menascea, L. Moronia, M.
Paganonia,b, K. Pauwelsa,b, D. Pedrinia, S. Pigazzinia,b,32, S. Ragazzia,b, T.
Tabarelli de Fatisa,b INFN Sezione di Napoli a, Università di Napoli ’Federico
II’ b, Napoli, Italy, Università della Basilicata c, Potenza, Italy,
Università G. Marconi d, Roma, Italy
S. Buontempoa, N. Cavalloa,c, S. Di Guidaa,d,16, F. Fabozzia,c, F. Fiengaa,b,
G. Galatia,b, A.O.M. Iorioa,b, W.A. Khana, L. Listaa, S. Meolaa,d,16, P.
Paoluccia,16, C. Sciaccaa,b, F. Thyssena, E. Voevodinaa,b INFN Sezione di
Padova a, Università di Padova b, Padova, Italy, Università di Trento c,
Trento, Italy
P. Azzia, N. Bacchettaa, L. Benatoa,b, D. Biselloa,b, A. Bolettia,b, R.
Carlina,b, A. Carvalho Antunes De Oliveiraa,b, P. Checchiaa, M. Dall’Ossoa,b,
P. De Castro Manzanoa, T. Dorigoa, U. Dossellia, U. Gasparinia,b, S.
Lacapraraa, P. Lujan, M. Margonia,b, A.T. Meneguzzoa,b, M. Michelottoa, N.
Pozzobona,b, P. Ronchesea,b, R. Rossina,b, F. Simonettoa,b, A. Tiko, E.
Torassaa, M. Zanettia,b, P. Zottoa,b, G. Zumerlea,b INFN Sezione di Pavia a,
Università di Pavia b, Pavia, Italy
A. Braghieria, A. Magnania, P. Montagnaa,b, S.P. Rattia,b, V. Rea, M.
Ressegottia,b, C. Riccardia,b, P. Salvinia, I. Vaia,b, P. Vituloa,b INFN
Sezione di Perugia a, Università di Perugia b, Perugia, Italy
L. Alunni Solestizia,b, M. Biasinia,b, G.M. Bileia, C. Cecchia,b, D.
Ciangottinia,b, L. Fanòa,b, P. Laricciaa,b, R. Leonardia,b, E. Manonia, G.
Mantovania,b, V. Mariania,b, M. Menichellia, A. Rossia,b, A. Santocchiaa,b, D.
Spigaa INFN Sezione di Pisa a, Università di Pisa b, Scuola Normale Superiore
di Pisa c, Pisa, Italy
K. Androsova, P. Azzurria,16, G. Bagliesia, L. Bianchinia, T. Boccalia, L.
Borrello, R. Castaldia, M.A. Cioccia,b, R. Dell’Orsoa, G. Fedia, L.
Gianninia,c, A. Giassia, M.T. Grippoa,31, F. Ligabuea,c, T. Lomtadzea, A.
Malara, E. Mancaa,c, G. Mandorlia,c, A. Messineoa,b, F. Pallaa, A. Rizzia,b,
P. Spagnoloa, R. Tenchinia, G. Tonellia,b, A. Venturia, P.G. Verdinia INFN
Sezione di Roma a, Sapienza Università di Roma b, Rome, Italy
L. Baronea,b, F. Cavallaria, M. Cipriania,b, N. Dacia, D. Del Rea,b, E. Di
Marcoa,b, M. Diemoza, S. Gellia,b, E. Longoa,b, B. Marzocchia,b, P.
Meridiania, G. Organtinia,b, F. Pandolfia, R. Paramattia,b, F. Preiatoa,b, S.
Rahatloua,b, C. Rovellia, F. Santanastasioa,b INFN Sezione di Torino a,
Università di Torino b, Torino, Italy, Università del Piemonte Orientale c,
Novara, Italy
N. Amapanea,b, R. Arcidiaconoa,c, S. Argiroa,b, M. Arneodoa,c, N. Bartosika,
R. Bellana,b, C. Biinoa, N. Cartigliaa, R. Castelloa,b, F. Cennaa,b, M.
Costaa,b, R. Covarellia,b, A. Deganoa,b, N. Demariaa, B. Kiania,b, C.
Mariottia, S. Masellia, E. Migliorea,b, V. Monacoa,b, E. Monteila,b, M.
Montenoa, M.M. Obertinoa,b, L. Pachera,b, N. Pastronea, M. Pelliccionia, G.L.
Pinna Angionia,b, A. Romeroa,b, M. Ruspaa,c, R. Sacchia,b, K. Shchelinaa,b, V.
Solaa, A. Solanoa,b, A. Staianoa INFN Sezione di Trieste a, Università di
Trieste b, Trieste, Italy
S. Belfortea, M. Casarsaa, F. Cossuttia, G. Della Riccaa,b, A. Zanettia
Kyungpook National University
D.H. Kim, G.N. Kim, M.S. Kim, J. Lee, S. Lee, S.W. Lee, C.S. Moon, Y.D. Oh, S.
Sekmen, D.C. Son, Y.C. Yang Chonnam National University, Institute for
Universe and Elementary Particles, Kwangju, Korea
H. Kim, D.H. Moon, G. Oh Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea
J.A. Brochero Cifuentes, J. Goh, T.J. Kim Korea University, Seoul, Korea
S. Cho, S. Choi, Y. Go, D. Gyun, S. Ha, B. Hong, Y. Jo, Y. Kim, K. Lee, K.S.
Lee, S. Lee, J. Lim, S.K. Park, Y. Roh Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
J. Almond, J. Kim, J.S. Kim, H. Lee, K. Lee, K. Nam, S.B. Oh, B.C. Radburn-
Smith, S.h. Seo, U.K. Yang, H.D. Yoo, G.B. Yu University of Seoul, Seoul,
Korea
H. Kim, J.H. Kim, J.S.H. Lee, I.C. Park Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea
Y. Choi, C. Hwang, J. Lee, I. Yu Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
V. Dudenas, A. Juodagalvis, J. Vaitkus National Centre for Particle Physics,
Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
I. Ahmed, Z.A. Ibrahim, M.A.B. Md Ali33, F. Mohamad Idris34, W.A.T. Wan
Abdullah, M.N. Yusli, Z. Zolkapli Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios
Avanzados del IPN, Mexico City, Mexico
H. Castilla-Valdez, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, M.C. Duran-Osuna, I. Heredia-De La
Cruz35, R. Lopez-Fernandez, J. Mejia Guisao, R.I. Rabadan-Trejo, G. Ramirez-
Sanchez, R Reyes-Almanza, A. Sanchez-Hernandez Universidad Iberoamericana,
Mexico City, Mexico
S. Carrillo Moreno, C. Oropeza Barrera, F. Vazquez Valencia Benemerita
Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico
J. Eysermans, I. Pedraza, H.A. Salazar Ibarguen, C. Uribe Estrada Universidad
Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, San Luis Potosí, Mexico
A. Morelos Pineda University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
D. Krofcheck University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
S. Bheesette, P.H. Butler National Centre for Physics, Quaid-I-Azam
University, Islamabad, Pakistan
A. Ahmad, M. Ahmad, Q. Hassan, H.R. Hoorani, A. Saddique, M.A. Shah, M.
Shoaib, M. Waqas National Centre for Nuclear Research, Swierk, Poland
H. Bialkowska, M. Bluj, B. Boimska, T. Frueboes, M. Górski, M. Kazana, K.
Nawrocki, M. Szleper, P. Traczyk, P. Zalewski Institute of Experimental
Physics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
K. Bunkowski, A. Byszuk36, K. Doroba, A. Kalinowski, M. Konecki, J.
Krolikowski, M. Misiura, M. Olszewski, A. Pyskir, M. Walczak Laboratório de
Instrumentação e Física Experimental de Partículas, Lisboa, Portugal
P. Bargassa, C. Beirão Da Cruz E Silva, A. Di Francesco, P. Faccioli, B.
Galinhas, M. Gallinaro, J. Hollar, N. Leonardo, L. Lloret Iglesias, M.V.
Nemallapudi, J. Seixas, G. Strong, O. Toldaiev, D. Vadruccio, J. Varela Joint
Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
S. Afanasiev, V. Alexakhin, P. Bunin, M. Gavrilenko, A. Golunov, I. Golutvin,
N. Gorbounov, V. Karjavin, A. Lanev, A. Malakhov, V. Matveev37,38, P. Moisenz,
V. Palichik, V. Perelygin, M. Savina, S. Shmatov, V. Smirnov, N. Voytishin, A.
Zarubin Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina (St. Petersburg),
Russia
Y. Ivanov, V. Kim39, E. Kuznetsova40, P. Levchenko, V. Murzin, V. Oreshkin, I.
Smirnov, D. Sosnov, V. Sulimov, L. Uvarov, S. Vavilov, A. Vorobyev Institute
for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia
Yu. Andreev, A. Dermenev, S. Gninenko, N. Golubev, A. Karneyeu, M. Kirsanov,
N. Krasnikov, A. Pashenkov, D. Tlisov, A. Toropin Institute for Theoretical
and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
V. Epshteyn, V. Gavrilov, N. Lychkovskaya, V. Popov, I. Pozdnyakov, G.
Safronov, A. Spiridonov, A. Stepennov, V. Stolin, M. Toms, E. Vlasov, A.
Zhokin Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Moscow, Russia
T. Aushev, A. Bylinkin38 National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow
Engineering Physics Institute’ (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia
R. Chistov41, M. Danilov41, P. Parygin, D. Philippov, S. Polikarpov, E.
Tarkovskii P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
V. Andreev, M. Azarkin38, I. Dremin38, M. Kirakosyan38, S.V. Rusakov, A.
Terkulov Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State
University, Moscow, Russia
A. Baskakov, A. Belyaev, E. Boos, V. Bunichev, M. Dubinin42, L. Dudko, A.
Ershov, V. Klyukhin, O. Kodolova, I. Lokhtin, I. Miagkov, S. Obraztsov, S.
Petrushanko, V. Savrin, A. Snigirev Novosibirsk State University (NSU),
Novosibirsk, Russia
V. Blinov43, D. Shtol43, Y. Skovpen43 State Research Center of Russian
Federation, Institute for High Energy Physics of NRC “Kurchatov Institute”,
Protvino, Russia
I. Azhgirey, I. Bayshev, S. Bitioukov, D. Elumakhov, A. Godizov, V. Kachanov,
A. Kalinin, D. Konstantinov, P. Mandrik, V. Petrov, R. Ryutin, A. Sobol, S.
Troshin, N. Tyurin, A. Uzunian, A. Volkov National Research Tomsk Polytechnic
University, Tomsk, Russia
A. Babaev University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of
Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia
P. Adzic44, P. Cirkovic, D. Devetak, M. Dordevic, J. Milosevic Centro de
Investigaciones Energéticas Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (CIEMAT), Madrid,
Spain
J. Alcaraz Maestre, A. Álvarez Fernández, I. Bachiller, M. Barrio Luna, M.
Cerrada, N. Colino, B. De La Cruz, A. Delgado Peris, C. Fernandez Bedoya, J.P.
Fernández Ramos, J. Flix, M.C. Fouz, O. Gonzalez Lopez, S. Goy Lopez, J.M.
Hernandez, M.I. Josa, D. Moran, A. Pérez-Calero Yzquierdo, J. Puerta Pelayo,
I. Redondo, L. Romero, M.S. Soares, A. Triossi Universidad Autónoma de Madrid,
Madrid, Spain
C. Albajar, J.F. de Trocóniz Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
J. Cuevas, C. Erice, J. Fernandez Menendez, S. Folgueras, I. Gonzalez
Caballero, J.R. González Fernández, E. Palencia Cortezon, S. Sanchez Cruz, P.
Vischia, J.M. Vizan Garcia Instituto de Física de Cantabria (IFCA), CSIC-
Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
I.J. Cabrillo, A. Calderon, B. Chazin Quero, J. Duarte Campderros, M.
Fernandez, P.J. Fernández Manteca, A. García Alonso, J. Garcia-Ferrero, G.
Gomez, A. Lopez Virto, J. Marco, C. Martinez Rivero, P. Martinez Ruiz del
Arbol, F. Matorras, J. Piedra Gomez, C. Prieels, T. Rodrigo, A. Ruiz-Jimeno,
L. Scodellaro, N. Trevisani, I. Vila, R. Vilar Cortabitarte CERN, European
Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland
D. Abbaneo, B. Akgun, E. Auffray, P. Baillon, A.H. Ball, D. Barney, J.
Bendavid, M. Bianco, A. Bocci, C. Botta, T. Camporesi, M. Cepeda, G.
Cerminara, E. Chapon, Y. Chen, D. d’Enterria, A. Dabrowski, V. Daponte, A.
David, M. De Gruttola, A. De Roeck, N. Deelen, M. Dobson, T. du Pree, M.
Dünser, N. Dupont, A. Elliott-Peisert, P. Everaerts, F. Fallavollita45, G.
Franzoni, J. Fulcher, W. Funk, D. Gigi, A. Gilbert, K. Gill, F. Glege, D.
Gulhan, J. Hegeman, V. Innocente, A. Jafari, P. Janot, O. Karacheban19, J.
Kieseler, V. Knünz, A. Kornmayer, M. Krammer1, C. Lange, P. Lecoq, C.
Lourenço, M.T. Lucchini, L. Malgeri, M. Mannelli, A. Martelli, F. Meijers,
J.A. Merlin, S. Mersi, E. Meschi, P. Milenovic46, F. Moortgat, M. Mulders, H.
Neugebauer, J. Ngadiuba, S. Orfanelli, L. Orsini, F. Pantaleo16, L. Pape, E.
Perez, M. Peruzzi, A. Petrilli, G. Petrucciani, A. Pfeiffer, M. Pierini, F.M.
Pitters, D. Rabady, A. Racz, T. Reis, G. Rolandi47, M. Rovere, H. Sakulin, C.
Schäfer, C. Schwick, M. Seidel, M. Selvaggi, A. Sharma, P. Silva, P.
Sphicas48, A. Stakia, J. Steggemann, M. Stoye, M. Tosi, D. Treille, A. Tsirou,
V. Veckalns49, M. Verweij, W.D. Zeuner Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen,
Switzerland
W. Bertl${}^{\textrm{\textdagger}}$, L. Caminada50, K. Deiters, W. Erdmann, R.
Horisberger, Q. Ingram, H.C. Kaestli, D. Kotlinski, U. Langenegger, T. Rohe,
S.A. Wiederkehr ETH Zurich - Institute for Particle Physics and Astrophysics
(IPA), Zurich, Switzerland
M. Backhaus, L. Bäni, P. Berger, B. Casal, N. Chernyavskaya, G. Dissertori, M.
Dittmar, M. Donegà, C. Dorfer, C. Grab, C. Heidegger, D. Hits, J. Hoss, T.
Klijnsma, W. Lustermann, M. Marionneau, M.T. Meinhard, D. Meister, F. Micheli,
P. Musella, F. Nessi-Tedaldi, J. Pata, F. Pauss, G. Perrin, L. Perrozzi, M.
Quittnat, M. Reichmann, D. Ruini, D.A. Sanz Becerra, M. Schönenberger, L.
Shchutska, V.R. Tavolaro, K. Theofilatos, M.L. Vesterbacka Olsson, R. Wallny,
D.H. Zhu Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
T.K. Aarrestad, C. Amsler51, D. Brzhechko, M.F. Canelli, A. De Cosa, R. Del
Burgo, S. Donato, C. Galloni, T. Hreus, B. Kilminster, I. Neutelings, D.
Pinna, G. Rauco, P. Robmann, D. Salerno, K. Schweiger, C. Seitz, Y. Takahashi,
A. Zucchetta National Central University, Chung-Li, Taiwan
V. Candelise, Y.H. Chang, K.y. Cheng, T.H. Doan, Sh. Jain, R. Khurana, C.M.
Kuo, W. Lin, A. Pozdnyakov, S.S. Yu National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei,
Taiwan
P. Chang, Y. Chao, K.F. Chen, P.H. Chen, F. Fiori, W.-S. Hou, Y. Hsiung, Arun
Kumar, Y.F. Liu, R.-S. Lu, E. Paganis, A. Psallidas, A. Steen, J.f. Tsai
Chulalongkorn University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physics, Bangkok,
Thailand
B. Asavapibhop, K. Kovitanggoon, G. Singh, N. Srimanobhas Çukurova University,
Physics Department, Science and Art Faculty, Adana, Turkey
M.N. Bakirci52, A. Bat, F. Boran, S. Damarseckin, Z.S. Demiroglu, C. Dozen, E.
Eskut, S. Girgis, G. Gokbulut, Y. Guler, I. Hos53, E.E. Kangal54, O. Kara, U.
Kiminsu, M. Oglakci, G. Onengut, K. Ozdemir55, S. Ozturk52, A. Polatoz, D.
Sunar Cerci56, U.G. Tok, S. Turkcapar, I.S. Zorbakir, C. Zorbilmez Middle East
Technical University, Physics Department, Ankara, Turkey
G. Karapinar57, K. Ocalan58, M. Yalvac, M. Zeyrek Bogazici University,
Istanbul, Turkey
I.O. Atakisi, E. Gülmez, M. Kaya59, O. Kaya60, S. Tekten, E.A. Yetkin61
Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
M.N. Agaras, S. Atay, A. Cakir, K. Cankocak, Y. Komurcu Institute for
Scintillation Materials of National Academy of Science of Ukraine, Kharkov,
Ukraine
B. Grynyov National Scientific Center, Kharkov Institute of Physics and
Technology, Kharkov, Ukraine
L. Levchuk University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
F. Ball, L. Beck, J.J. Brooke, D. Burns, E. Clement, D. Cussans, O. Davignon,
H. Flacher, J. Goldstein, G.P. Heath, H.F. Heath, L. Kreczko, D.M. Newbold62,
S. Paramesvaran, T. Sakuma, S. Seif El Nasr-storey, D. Smith, V.J. Smith
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
K.W. Bell, A. Belyaev63, C. Brew, R.M. Brown, D. Cieri, D.J.A. Cockerill, J.A.
Coughlan, K. Harder, S. Harper, J. Linacre, E. Olaiya, D. Petyt, C.H.
Shepherd-Themistocleous, A. Thea, I.R. Tomalin, T. Williams, W.J. Womersley
Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
G. Auzinger, R. Bainbridge, P. Bloch, J. Borg, S. Breeze, O. Buchmuller, A.
Bundock, S. Casasso, D. Colling, L. Corpe, P. Dauncey, G. Davies, M. Della
Negra, R. Di Maria, A. Elwood, Y. Haddad, G. Hall, G. Iles, T. James, M. Komm,
R. Lane, C. Laner, L. Lyons, A.-M. Magnan, S. Malik, L. Mastrolorenzo, T.
Matsushita, J. Nash64, A. Nikitenko7, V. Palladino, M. Pesaresi, A. Richards,
A. Rose, E. Scott, C. Seez, A. Shtipliyski, T. Strebler, S. Summers, A.
Tapper, K. Uchida, M. Vazquez Acosta65, T. Virdee16, N. Wardle, D.
Winterbottom, J. Wright, S.C. Zenz Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
J.E. Cole, P.R. Hobson, A. Khan, P. Kyberd, A. Morton, I.D. Reid, L.
Teodorescu, S. Zahid Baylor University, Waco, USA
A. Borzou, K. Call, J. Dittmann, K. Hatakeyama, H. Liu, N. Pastika, C. Smith
Catholic University of America, Washington DC, USA
R. Bartek, A. Dominguez The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA
A. Buccilli, S.I. Cooper, C. Henderson, P. Rumerio, C. West Boston University,
Boston, USA
D. Arcaro, A. Avetisyan, T. Bose, D. Gastler, D. Rankin, C. Richardson, J.
Rohlf, L. Sulak, D. Zou Brown University, Providence, USA
G. Benelli, D. Cutts, M. Hadley, J. Hakala, U. Heintz, J.M. Hogan66, K.H.M.
Kwok, E. Laird, G. Landsberg, J. Lee, Z. Mao, M. Narain, J. Pazzini, S.
Piperov, S. Sagir, R. Syarif, D. Yu University of California, Davis, Davis,
USA
R. Band, C. Brainerd, R. Breedon, D. Burns, M. Calderon De La Barca Sanchez,
M. Chertok, J. Conway, R. Conway, P.T. Cox, R. Erbacher, C. Flores, G. Funk,
W. Ko, R. Lander, C. Mclean, M. Mulhearn, D. Pellett, J. Pilot, S. Shalhout,
M. Shi, J. Smith, D. Stolp, D. Taylor, K. Tos, M. Tripathi, Z. Wang, F. Zhang
University of California, Los Angeles, USA
M. Bachtis, C. Bravo, R. Cousins, A. Dasgupta, A. Florent, J. Hauser, M.
Ignatenko, N. Mccoll, S. Regnard, D. Saltzberg, C. Schnaible, V. Valuev
University of California, Riverside, Riverside, USA
E. Bouvier, K. Burt, R. Clare, J. Ellison, J.W. Gary, S.M.A. Ghiasi Shirazi,
G. Hanson, G. Karapostoli, E. Kennedy, F. Lacroix, O.R. Long, M. Olmedo
Negrete, M.I. Paneva, W. Si, L. Wang, H. Wei, S. Wimpenny, B.R. Yates
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, USA
J.G. Branson, S. Cittolin, M. Derdzinski, R. Gerosa, D. Gilbert, B. Hashemi,
A. Holzner, D. Klein, G. Kole, V. Krutelyov, J. Letts, M. Masciovecchio, D.
Olivito, S. Padhi, M. Pieri, M. Sani, V. Sharma, S. Simon, M. Tadel, A.
Vartak, S. Wasserbaech67, J. Wood, F. Würthwein, A. Yagil, G. Zevi Della Porta
University of California, Santa Barbara - Department of Physics, Santa
Barbara, USA
N. Amin, R. Bhandari, J. Bradmiller-Feld, C. Campagnari, M. Citron, A. Dishaw,
V. Dutta, M. Franco Sevilla, L. Gouskos, R. Heller, J. Incandela, A.
Ovcharova, H. Qu, J. Richman, D. Stuart, I. Suarez, J. Yoo California
Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA
D. Anderson, A. Bornheim, J. Bunn, J.M. Lawhorn, H.B. Newman, T.Q. Nguyen, C.
Pena, M. Spiropulu, J.R. Vlimant, R. Wilkinson, S. Xie, Z. Zhang, R.Y. Zhu
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA
M.B. Andrews, T. Ferguson, T. Mudholkar, M. Paulini, J. Russ, M. Sun, H.
Vogel, I. Vorobiev, M. Weinberg University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, USA
J.P. Cumalat, W.T. Ford, F. Jensen, A. Johnson, M. Krohn, S. Leontsinis, E.
MacDonald, T. Mulholland, K. Stenson, K.A. Ulmer, S.R. Wagner Cornell
University, Ithaca, USA
J. Alexander, J. Chaves, Y. Cheng, J. Chu, A. Datta, K. Mcdermott, N. Mirman,
J.R. Patterson, D. Quach, A. Rinkevicius, A. Ryd, L. Skinnari, L. Soffi, S.M.
Tan, Z. Tao, J. Thom, J. Tucker, P. Wittich, M. Zientek Fermi National
Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USA
S. Abdullin, M. Albrow, M. Alyari, G. Apollinari, A. Apresyan, A. Apyan, S.
Banerjee, L.A.T. Bauerdick, A. Beretvas, J. Berryhill, P.C. Bhat, G.
Bolla${}^{\textrm{\textdagger}}$, K. Burkett, J.N. Butler, A. Canepa, G.B.
Cerati, H.W.K. Cheung, F. Chlebana, M. Cremonesi, J. Duarte, V.D. Elvira, J.
Freeman, Z. Gecse, E. Gottschalk, L. Gray, D. Green, S. Grünendahl, O.
Gutsche, J. Hanlon, R.M. Harris, S. Hasegawa, J. Hirschauer, Z. Hu, B.
Jayatilaka, S. Jindariani, M. Johnson, U. Joshi, B. Klima, M.J. Kortelainen,
B. Kreis, S. Lammel, D. Lincoln, R. Lipton, M. Liu, T. Liu, R. Lopes De Sá, J.
Lykken, K. Maeshima, N. Magini, J.M. Marraffino, D. Mason, P. McBride, P.
Merkel, S. Mrenna, S. Nahn, V. O’Dell, K. Pedro, O. Prokofyev, G. Rakness, L.
Ristori, A. Savoy-Navarro68, B. Schneider, E. Sexton-Kennedy, A. Soha, W.J.
Spalding, L. Spiegel, S. Stoynev, J. Strait, N. Strobbe, L. Taylor, S.
Tkaczyk, N.V. Tran, L. Uplegger, E.W. Vaandering, C. Vernieri, M. Verzocchi,
R. Vidal, M. Wang, H.A. Weber, A. Whitbeck, W. Wu University of Florida,
Gainesville, USA
D. Acosta, P. Avery, P. Bortignon, D. Bourilkov, A. Brinkerhoff, A. Carnes, M.
Carver, D. Curry, R.D. Field, I.K. Furic, S.V. Gleyzer, D. Guerrero, B.M.
Joshi, J. Konigsberg, A. Korytov, K. Kotov, P. Ma, K. Matchev, H. Mei, G.
Mitselmakher, K. Shi, D. Sperka, N. Terentyev, L. Thomas, J. Wang, S. Wang, J.
Yelton Florida International University, Miami, USA
Y.R. Joshi, S. Linn, P. Markowitz, J.L. Rodriguez Florida State University,
Tallahassee, USA
A. Ackert, T. Adams, A. Askew, S. Hagopian, V. Hagopian, K.F. Johnson, T.
Kolberg, G. Martinez, T. Perry, H. Prosper, A. Saha, A. Santra, V. Sharma, R.
Yohay Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, USA
M.M. Baarmand, V. Bhopatkar, S. Colafranceschi, M. Hohlmann, D. Noonan, T.
Roy, F. Yumiceva University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, USA
M.R. Adams, L. Apanasevich, D. Berry, R.R. Betts, R. Cavanaugh, X. Chen, S.
Dittmer, O. Evdokimov, C.E. Gerber, D.A. Hangal, D.J. Hofman, K. Jung, J.
Kamin, I.D. Sandoval Gonzalez, M.B. Tonjes, N. Varelas, H. Wang, Z. Wu, J.
Zhang The University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
B. Bilki69, W. Clarida, K. Dilsiz70, S. Durgut, R.P. Gandrajula, M.
Haytmyradov, V. Khristenko, J.-P. Merlo, H. Mermerkaya71, A. Mestvirishvili,
A. Moeller, J. Nachtman, H. Ogul72, Y. Onel, F. Ozok73, A. Penzo, C. Snyder,
E. Tiras, J. Wetzel, K. Yi Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
B. Blumenfeld, A. Cocoros, N. Eminizer, D. Fehling, L. Feng, A.V. Gritsan,
W.T. Hung, P. Maksimovic, J. Roskes, U. Sarica, M. Swartz, M. Xiao, C. You The
University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA
A. Al-bataineh, P. Baringer, A. Bean, S. Boren, J. Bowen, J. Castle, S.
Khalil, A. Kropivnitskaya, D. Majumder, W. Mcbrayer, M. Murray, C. Rogan, C.
Royon, S. Sanders, E. Schmitz, J.D. Tapia Takaki, Q. Wang Kansas State
University, Manhattan, USA
A. Ivanov, K. Kaadze, Y. Maravin, A. Modak, A. Mohammadi, L.K. Saini, N.
Skhirtladze Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA
F. Rebassoo, D. Wright University of Maryland, College Park, USA
A. Baden, O. Baron, A. Belloni, S.C. Eno, Y. Feng, C. Ferraioli, N.J. Hadley,
S. Jabeen, G.Y. Jeng, R.G. Kellogg, J. Kunkle, A.C. Mignerey, F. Ricci-Tam,
Y.H. Shin, A. Skuja, S.C. Tonwar Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, USA
D. Abercrombie, B. Allen, V. Azzolini, R. Barbieri, A. Baty, G. Bauer, R. Bi,
S. Brandt, W. Busza, I.A. Cali, M. D’Alfonso, Z. Demiragli, G. Gomez Ceballos,
M. Goncharov, P. Harris, D. Hsu, M. Hu, Y. Iiyama, G.M. Innocenti, M. Klute,
D. Kovalskyi, Y.-J. Lee, A. Levin, P.D. Luckey, B. Maier, A.C. Marini, C.
Mcginn, C. Mironov, S. Narayanan, X. Niu, C. Paus, C. Roland, G. Roland,
G.S.F. Stephans, K. Sumorok, K. Tatar, D. Velicanu, J. Wang, T.W. Wang, B.
Wyslouch, S. Zhaozhong University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
A.C. Benvenuti, R.M. Chatterjee, A. Evans, P. Hansen, S. Kalafut, Y. Kubota,
Z. Lesko, J. Mans, S. Nourbakhsh, N. Ruckstuhl, R. Rusack, J. Turkewitz, M.A.
Wadud University of Mississippi, Oxford, USA
J.G. Acosta, S. Oliveros University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA
E. Avdeeva, K. Bloom, D.R. Claes, C. Fangmeier, F. Golf, R. Gonzalez Suarez,
R. Kamalieddin, I. Kravchenko, J. Monroy, J.E. Siado, G.R. Snow, B. Stieger
State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA
C. Harrington, I. Iashvili, A. Kharchilava, D. Nguyen, A. Parker, S.
Rappoccio, B. Roozbahani Northeastern University, Boston, USA
G. Alverson, E. Barberis, C. Freer, A. Hortiangtham, A. Massironi, D.M. Morse,
T. Orimoto, R. Teixeira De Lima, T. Wamorkar, B. Wang, A. Wisecarver, D. Wood
Northwestern University, Evanston, USA
S. Bhattacharya, O. Charaf, K.A. Hahn, N. Mucia, N. Odell, M.H. Schmitt, K.
Sung, M. Trovato, M. Velasco University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
R. Bucci, N. Dev, M. Hildreth, K. Hurtado Anampa, C. Jessop, D.J. Karmgard, N.
Kellams, K. Lannon, W. Li, N. Loukas, N. Marinelli, F. Meng, C. Mueller, Y.
Musienko37, M. Planer, A. Reinsvold, R. Ruchti, P. Siddireddy, G. Smith, S.
Taroni, M. Wayne, A. Wightman, M. Wolf, A. Woodard The Ohio State University,
Columbus, USA
J. Alimena, L. Antonelli, B. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, S. Flowers, B. Francis, A.
Hart, C. Hill, W. Ji, T.Y. Ling, W. Luo, B.L. Winer, H.W. Wulsin Princeton
University, Princeton, USA
S. Cooperstein, O. Driga, P. Elmer, J. Hardenbrook, P. Hebda, S. Higginbotham,
A. Kalogeropoulos, D. Lange, J. Luo, D. Marlow, K. Mei, I. Ojalvo, J. Olsen,
C. Palmer, P. Piroué, J. Salfeld-Nebgen, D. Stickland, C. Tully University of
Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, USA
S. Malik, S. Norberg Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
A. Barker, V.E. Barnes, S. Das, L. Gutay, M. Jones, A.W. Jung, A. Khatiwada,
D.H. Miller, N. Neumeister, C.C. Peng, H. Qiu, J.F. Schulte, J. Sun, F. Wang,
R. Xiao, W. Xie Purdue University Northwest, Hammond, USA
T. Cheng, J. Dolen, N. Parashar Rice University, Houston, USA
Z. Chen, K.M. Ecklund, S. Freed, F.J.M. Geurts, M. Guilbaud, M. Kilpatrick, W.
Li, B. Michlin, B.P. Padley, J. Roberts, J. Rorie, W. Shi, Z. Tu, J. Zabel, A.
Zhang University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
A. Bodek, P. de Barbaro, R. Demina, Y.t. Duh, T. Ferbel, M. Galanti, A.
Garcia-Bellido, J. Han, O. Hindrichs, A. Khukhunaishvili, K.H. Lo, P. Tan, M.
Verzetti The Rockefeller University, New York, USA
R. Ciesielski, K. Goulianos, C. Mesropian Rutgers, The State University of New
Jersey, Piscataway, USA
A. Agapitos, J.P. Chou, Y. Gershtein, T.A. Gómez Espinosa, E. Halkiadakis, M.
Heindl, E. Hughes, S. Kaplan, R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, S. Kyriacou, A. Lath,
R. Montalvo, K. Nash, M. Osherson, H. Saka, S. Salur, S. Schnetzer, D.
Sheffield, S. Somalwar, R. Stone, S. Thomas, P. Thomassen, M. Walker
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
A.G. Delannoy, J. Heideman, G. Riley, K. Rose, S. Spanier, K. Thapa Texas A&M
University, College Station, USA
O. Bouhali74, A. Castaneda Hernandez74, A. Celik, M. Dalchenko, M. De Mattia,
A. Delgado, S. Dildick, R. Eusebi, J. Gilmore, T. Huang, T. Kamon75, R.
Mueller, Y. Pakhotin, R. Patel, A. Perloff, L. Perniè, D. Rathjens, A.
Safonov, A. Tatarinov Texas Tech University, Lubbock, USA
N. Akchurin, J. Damgov, F. De Guio, P.R. Dudero, J. Faulkner, E. Gurpinar, S.
Kunori, K. Lamichhane, S.W. Lee, T. Mengke, S. Muthumuni, T. Peltola, S.
Undleeb, I. Volobouev, Z. Wang Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
S. Greene, A. Gurrola, R. Janjam, W. Johns, C. Maguire, A. Melo, H. Ni, K.
Padeken, J.D. Ruiz Alvarez, P. Sheldon, S. Tuo, J. Velkovska, Q. Xu University
of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA
M.W. Arenton, P. Barria, B. Cox, R. Hirosky, M. Joyce, A. Ledovskoy, H. Li, C.
Neu, T. Sinthuprasith, Y. Wang, E. Wolfe, F. Xia Wayne State University,
Detroit, USA
R. Harr, P.E. Karchin, N. Poudyal, J. Sturdy, P. Thapa, S. Zaleski University
of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, WI, USA
M. Brodski, J. Buchanan, C. Caillol, D. Carlsmith, S. Dasu, L. Dodd, S. Duric,
B. Gomber, M. Grothe, M. Herndon, A. Hervé, U. Hussain, P. Klabbers, A.
Lanaro, A. Levine, K. Long, R. Loveless, V. Rekovic, T. Ruggles, A. Savin, N.
Smith, W.H. Smith, N. Woods †: Deceased
1: Also at Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria
2: Also at IRFU, CEA, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
3: Also at Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
4: Also at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
5: Also at Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil
6: Also at Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
7: Also at Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
8: Also at Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
9: Also at Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt
10: Now at Zewail City of Science and Technology, Zewail, Egypt
11: Also at British University in Egypt, Cairo, Egypt
12: Now at Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt
13: Also at Department of Physics, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi
Arabia
14: Also at Université de Haute Alsace, Mulhouse, France
15: Also at Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State
University, Moscow, Russia
16: Also at CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva,
Switzerland
17: Also at RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen,
Germany
18: Also at University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
19: Also at Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus, Germany
20: Also at MTA-ELTE Lendület CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, Eötvös
Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
21: Also at Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary
22: Also at Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
23: Also at Indian Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India
24: Also at Institute of Physics, Bhubaneswar, India
25: Also at Shoolini University, Solan, India
26: Also at University of Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan, India
27: Also at University of Ruhuna, Matara, Sri Lanka
28: Also at Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran
29: Also at Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
30: Also at Plasma Physics Research Center, Science and Research Branch,
Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
31: Also at Università degli Studi di Siena, Siena, Italy
32: Also at INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a, Università di Milano-Bicocca b,
Milano, Italy
33: Also at International Islamic University of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia
34: Also at Malaysian Nuclear Agency, MOSTI, Kajang, Malaysia
35: Also at Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, Mexico city, Mexico
36: Also at Warsaw University of Technology, Institute of Electronic Systems,
Warsaw, Poland
37: Also at Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia
38: Now at National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics
Institute’ (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia
39: Also at St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, St. Petersburg,
Russia
40: Also at University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
41: Also at P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
42: Also at California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA
43: Also at Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk, Russia
44: Also at Faculty of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
45: Also at INFN Sezione di Pavia a, Università di Pavia b, Pavia, Italy
46: Also at University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of
Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia
47: Also at Scuola Normale e Sezione dell’INFN, Pisa, Italy
48: Also at National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
49: Also at Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia
50: Also at Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
51: Also at Stefan Meyer Institute for Subatomic Physics (SMI), Vienna,
Austria
52: Also at Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey
53: Also at Istanbul Aydin University, Istanbul, Turkey
54: Also at Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey
55: Also at Piri Reis University, Istanbul, Turkey
56: Also at Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey
57: Also at Izmir Institute of Technology, Izmir, Turkey
58: Also at Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey
59: Also at Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey
60: Also at Kafkas University, Kars, Turkey
61: Also at Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey
62: Also at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
63: Also at School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southampton,
Southampton, United Kingdom
64: Also at Monash University, Faculty of Science, Clayton, Australia
65: Also at Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, La Laguna, Spain
66: Also at Bethel University, St. Paul, USA
67: Also at Utah Valley University, Orem, USA
68: Also at Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
69: Also at Beykent University, Istanbul, Turkey
70: Also at Bingol University, Bingol, Turkey
71: Also at Erzincan University, Erzincan, Turkey
72: Also at Sinop University, Sinop, Turkey
73: Also at Mimar Sinan University, Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey
74: Also at Texas A&M University at Qatar, Doha, Qatar
75: Also at Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea