2023 053 22 March

Inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair production in pp collisions at
$\sqrt{s}~{}=~{}13$ TeV

ALICE Collaboration††thanks: See Appendix A for the list of collaboration
members ALICE Collaboration

The production cross section of inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs in pp collisions
at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}~{}=~{}13$ TeV is measured with ALICE. The
measurement is performed for $\rm{J}/\psi$ in the rapidity interval
$2.5<y<4.0$ and for transverse momentum $p_{\rm T}>0$. The production cross
section of inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs is reported to be $10.3\pm
2.3\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm 1.3\,{\rm(syst.)}$ nb in this kinematic interval. The
contribution from non-prompt $\rm{J}/\psi$ (i.e. originated from beauty-hadron
decays) to the inclusive sample is evaluated. The results are discussed and
compared with data.

##  1 Introduction

In the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) parton model [1], hadrons are composed of
elementary constituents, the partons. Due to the composite nature of hadrons,
multiple parton hard scatterings can occur in a hadron–hadron collision. Thus,
it is possible to have two or more hard parton interactions simultaneously.
Multiple parton interactions (MPI) have been studied since the introduction of
the parton model [2, 3]. Further studies included the generalization of the
QCD evolution equations into multiparton distribution and fragmentation
functions [4, 5], and a discussion on the possible correlations in the colour
and spin degrees of freedom [6]. Double-parton scatterings (DPS) are the
simplest case of MPI, and were found to play the most important role in
processes with final states such as four jets, four leptons or $n$-jet +
W/$\gamma$ measurements [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15]. These studies were
complemented by several measurements in hadron collisions at center-of-mass
energies ($\sqrt{s}$) ranging from 63 GeV to 1.96 TeV [16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
22].

At the LHC energies, the probability to have multiple parton interactions
increases: as with the increase of collision energy, partons with smaller
momentum fraction $x$ are probed, with larger fluxes. Recent measurements have
shown the relevance of MPI at the LHC [23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28], and have
contributed to stimulate recent progresses in the theoretical understanding of
MPI [29, 30, 31, 32, 33]. Nevertheless, a quantitative estimate of the DPS
impact on observables remains challenging. Neglecting the parton correlations
in the proton, the DPS contribution to a final state $A+B$ can be evaluated as
the product of the parton level cross sections ($\widehat{\sigma}$) divided by
an effective cross section ($\sigma_{\rm eff}$) [12, 13, 34]

$\sigma^{\rm
DPS}_{A,B}=\frac{m}{2}\,\frac{\widehat{\sigma}^{A}\,\widehat{\sigma}^{B}}{\sigma_{\rm
eff}}\,,$ (1)

where the parameter $m$ is a symmetry factor, $m=1$ if $A=B$, and 2 otherwise.
The effective cross section is a phenomenological parameter related to the
transverse overlap function between the partons of the proton, and is thought
to be universal. It was found to range between 2 and 25 mb [22, 35, 36, 37,
38, 39, 27, 23, 40, 20, 18, 41, 25, 24, 42].

Double particle production is typically exploited to study DPS. A non
exhaustive list of these studies are the measurements of the production cross
sections of double quarkonium, i.e. ${\rm J}/\psi$ pairs [43, 44, 35, 45, 46,
36, 22], $\Upsilon$ pairs [47], or ${\rm J}/\psi+\Upsilon$ [37], electroweak
boson plus quarkonium [22, 48, 26, 38, 39, 27], double charm production [23],
charmed hadrons plus quarkonium [27, 23], electroweak boson plus open charm
[23, 49], as well as measurements with jets in the final state, multi-jets
[16, 17, 18, 50], $\gamma+3$-jets [19, 20, 21], $2\gamma+2$-jets [51], and W +
2-jets [25]. The recent observation of triple J/$\psi$ production proposes an
additional channel to study double and triple parton scatterings [52].

In the quarkonium sector, quarkonium-pair production is a golden tool to probe
the production mechanism of heavy quarkonia [53, 54, 55]. The production
mechanism of heavy quarkonia is not fully understood after more than forty
years of study, and considered a long-standing puzzle of QCD. The colour-
singlet model (CSM), which assumes the formation of an intermediate ${\rm
Q}\overline{\rm Q}$ state with the quantum numbers of the final state,
underestimates the production cross section at high $p_{\rm T}$ both at
leading-order (LO) and next-to-leading-order (NLO) [56, 57, 58]. The recent
CSM next-to-next-to-leading-order NNLO⋆ calculations have reduced the
discrepancies [56, 59]. Non-relativistic QCD (NRQCD) calculations consider
both colour-singlet (CS) and colour-octet (CO) states of the ${\rm
Q}\overline{\rm Q}$ pair [60], but fail to predict at the same time the
production cross section and polarisation [61, 62, 63, 64, 65]. The selection
rules for pair production in the CS process of LO NRQCD forbid the feed-down
from cascade decays of excited charge-conjugate-even states, e.g. $\chi_{\rm
c}\rightarrow{\rm J}/\psi\,\gamma$, whose contribution is significant in
single quarkonium production, and makes difficult the comparison of data to
model calculations. As a consequence, quarkonium-pair production provides
stringent tests of model calculations.

In this letter we report the measurement of inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair
production cross section in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV at large
rapidity ($2.5<y<4.0$) with ALICE. Inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ results correspond
to the sum two contributions: the prompt contribution, originated from direct
charm decays or decays of higher-mass excited states; and the non-prompt
contribution, steaming from beauty decays. The results corroborate analogous
measurements performed in a similar rapidity interval by LHCb [36]. They
constitute a probe to study quarkonium production mechanisms and the DPS
contribution.

##  2 Experimental apparatus and data sample

A description of the ALICE detector and its performances can be found in Refs.
[66, 67]. At forward rapidity ($2.5<y<4.0$) the production of quarkonium
states is measured in the muon spectrometer down to $p_{\rm T}=0$ via their
dimuon decay channel. The muon spectrometer of ALICE consists of a ten
interaction length thick front absorber to filter muons, five tracking
stations of two planes of cathode pad chambers each (MCH), a dipole magnet
with a field integral of 3 Tm surrounding the third tracking station, a 1.2 m
thick iron wall to absorb secondary hadrons escaping from the front absorber
and low momentum muons coming mainly from $\pi$ and K decays, and two trigger
stations made of two planes of resistive plate chambers each (MTR) [68]. The
silicon pixel detector (SPD) and scintillator arrays (V0) are also used in
this analysis. The V0 counters, two arrays of 32 scintillator tiles each,
cover $2.8\leq\eta\leq 5.1$ (V0A) and $-3.7\leq\eta\leq-1.7$ (V0C) and provide
trigger information. The minimum bias (MB) trigger requirement consists of a
logical AND of a signal in V0A and in V0C. The SPD, two cylindrical layers
covering $|\eta|\leq 2.0$ and $|\eta|\leq 1.4$ for the inner and outer layers,
respectively, is dedicated to the vertex reconstruction and allows estimating
pile-up. The maximum interaction rate for the analysed data sample is 260 kHz,
and the maximum pile-up probability is about $5\times 10^{-3}$, negligible for
this measurement.

The $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair analysis is performed using data from pp collisions at
$\sqrt{s}~{}=~{}13$ TeV collected from 2016 to 2018. The event sample was
selected using the dimuon trigger condition, which is defined as the
coincidence between the MB requirement and two opposite-charge sign track
segments in the muon spectrometer trigger stations. Each track segment in the
trigger stations is required to have a transverse momentum, evaluated online,
larger than about 0.5 GeV/$c$. Only events passing a selection criterion to
remove beam–background collisions contamination, based on the timing
information from the V0 arrays, are considered in the analysis.

When multiple primary vertices are reconstructed by the SPD, the event is
tagged as pile-up and removed from this analysis. In order to avoid acceptance
biases on the reconstructed SPD tracklets, events with a displaced vertex with
respect to centre of the SPD detector along the beam direction are discarded
according to the requirement $|v_{z}|\leq 10$ cm. Considering the above
selections, the total number of dimuon triggered events in the sample sums up
to $587.4\times 10^{6}$ events and corresponds to an integrated luminosity of
$24.11\pm 0.01(\rm{stat.})\pm 0.80(\rm{syst.})\,\rm{pb}^{-1}$.

##  3 Analysis

$\rm{J}/\psi$ candidates are built from muon pairs of opposite-charge sign.
Muons are identified by requiring that selected tracks in the MCH have a
matching track segment in MTR. Only muon tracks within the detector acceptance
are kept for analysis. Tracks are required to be within
$-4.0<\eta^{\mu}<-2.5$, and the radial distance from the beam axis at the end
of the front absorber, $R_{\rm abs}$, is limited to $17.6<R_{\rm abs}<89.5$ cm
[69]. $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair candidates are reconstructed from all combinations of
double dimuon pairs (each dimuon consisting of an opposite-charge sign muon
pair) per event.

The production cross section of inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs is determined as

$\sigma({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm J}/\psi)=\frac{N}{\mathcal{L}_{\rm
int}\times\epsilon\times B^{2}({\rm J}/\psi\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-})}\,,$ (2)

where $N$ is the signal estimate, $\epsilon$ is the acceptance-times-
efficiency correction, $B(\rm{J}/\psi\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-})=(5.961\pm
0.033)\%$ is the branching fraction of $\rm{J}/\psi\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$
[70], and $\mathcal{L}_{\rm int}$ is the integrated luminosity.

The $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair signal is evaluated from a fit to the 2-dimensional
invariant mass distribution. A two-step procedure was chosen. The first step
exploits the 1-dimensional distribution of all $\rm{J}/\psi$ candidates in the
data sample analysed, to obtain a good description of the $\rm{J}/\psi$ line
shape from data. A fit is performed with a superposition of $\rm{J}/\psi$ and
$\psi(2S)$ signal functions and a background function. The $\rm{J}/\psi$ mass,
width, and normalisation are left free in the procedure. Instead, the
$\psi(2S)$ mass and width are bound to those of $\rm{J}/\psi$ as described in
Ref. [71]. The 2-dimensional invariant mass distribution of $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair
candidates ($m_{1}(\mu_{1}^{+}\mu_{1}^{-})$, $m_{2}(\mu_{2}^{+}\mu_{2}^{-})$)
is fit in the second step.

$\displaystyle F(m_{1},m_{2})$ $\displaystyle=$ $\displaystyle N\times
S_{1}(m_{1})\times S_{2}(m_{2})+R_{B_{1},S_{2}}\times B_{1}(m_{1})\times
S_{2}(m_{2})$ $\displaystyle+R_{S_{1},B_{2}}\times S_{1}(m_{1})\times
B_{2}(m_{2})+R_{B_{1},B_{2}}\times B_{1}(m_{1})\times B_{2}(m_{2})\,,$

where $N$ and $R$ are the corresponding normalisation parameters. The
$\psi(2S)$ contribution is neglected in the 2-dimensional fit. The
$\rm{J}/\psi$ pole mass and width determined from the first step are fixed in
the second step of the fit, the rest of the fit parameters are left free.
Different combinations of functional forms are used to determine the raw yield
and its uncertainties. The signal $S$ is modelled by a Crystal Ball function
including a Gaussian core and two asymmetric power-law tails [72]. The power-
law tail parameters are obtained both from data or Monte Carlo and fixed in
the fits [69]. The background $B$ contribution is described by either the sum
of two exponentials, an exponential of a second order polynomial, or the ratio
of a first-order to a second-order polynomials. The mass distribution is fit
in two different mass intervals to test the results stability, i.e. [2.0, 4.5]
and [2.2, 4.9] GeV/$c^{2}$. As the candidates were assigned randomly, the fit
function is symmetric under exchange of $m_{1}$ and $m_{2}$. The projections
of one of the fits on $m_{1}(\mu_{1}^{+}\mu_{1}^{-})$ and
$m_{2}(\mu_{2}^{+}\mu_{2}^{-})$ are shown in Fig. 1. The $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair
signal and statistical uncertainty are evaluated as the average of the values
obtained in the twelve fit configurations. The systematic uncertainty is given
by their standard deviation. The raw yield is $N=59.3\pm
13.5\,{\rm(stat)}\,\pm 4.4\,{\rm(syst)}$.

Figure 1: Projections of a fit to the 2-dimensional invariant mass
distribution for inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair candidates for (left)
$m_{1}(\mu_{1}^{+}\mu_{1}^{-})$ and (right) $m_{2}(\mu_{2}^{+}\mu_{2}^{-})$.
The (black) markers show data. The (black) solid line represents the total fit
function. The (blue and green) dashed-dotted lines indicate the background
contribution from a combination of a real $\rm{J}/\psi$ signal with a
combinatorial candidate. The (yellow) dotted line represents muon pairs from
combinatorial background.

The acceptance, reconstruction and selection efficiency is evaluated assuming
factorisation of the corrections of the $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair as

$\epsilon({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm J}/\psi)=\epsilon({\rm
J}/\psi)\times\epsilon({\rm J}/\psi)\,.$ (4)

The $\rm{J}/\psi$ $\epsilon$ is computed from Monte Carlo simulations as
described in Ref. [69]. An iterative procedure is used to generate input
rapidity ($y$) and transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) distributions from data.
The $\rm{J}/\psi$ are decayed into pairs of muons using EVTGEN [73] and PHOTOS
[74]. A GEANT3 [75] simulation is performed to transport the decay muons
through the apparatus including a realistic description of the detector
conditions during data taking. The validity of the factorisation approach for
the efficiency calculation was tested. The invariant mass distribution was
compared with the corresponding one after applying a 2-dimensional ($y$,
$p_{\rm T}$) acceptance-times-efficiency correction per $\rm{J}/\psi$
candidate. The shapes of the 2-dimensional invariant mass distribution, and
their projections are not modified by the correction, confirming the validity
of our assumption.

Various sources of systematic uncertainties on the $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair
production cross section are considered:  (i) the signal extraction,  (ii) the
branching fraction uncertainty,  (iii) the luminosity normalisation, and  (iv)
the acceptance-times-efficiency correction.  Details on the signal extraction
procedure were given previously in this Letter. The systematic uncertainty on
the signal extraction, obtained as described above, amounts to 7.4%. The
branching fraction uncertainty is 0.6% for single $\rm{J}/\psi$ [70], thus
1.1% for $\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs. The influence of the luminosity normalisation
factor is evaluated by computing the equivalent number of minimum-bias events
in the analysed dimuon sample with different methods as described in Ref.
[76], which amounts to 2.9%. The uncertainty on the minimum bias cross
section, evaluated in a van der Meer scan (1.6%), is also taken into account
in the calculation [77]. These two sources lead to a 3.3% systematic
uncertainty for the luminosity. The systematic uncertainty on the acceptance-
times-efficiency correction contains contributions from  (i) the input $p_{\rm
T}$ and $y$ distributions,  (ii) the tracking efficiency in the MCH,  (iii)
the MTR trigger efficiency, and  (iv) the matching of the reconstructed tracks
in the MCH with the track segments in the MTR.  The influence of the simulated
$\rm{J}/\psi$ $p_{\rm T}$ and $y$ distributions is tested by comparing the
corrected yield obtained via the iterative procedure, with the one obtained
from an efficiency-corrected invariant mass distribution. For this exercise, a
2-dimensional $\epsilon(p_{\rm T},y)$ correction is applied to each
$\rm{J}/\psi$ candidate in order to build the efficiency-corrected invariant
mass distribution, which was then fit to obtain the corresponding corrected
yield. A 0.5% uncertainty is assigned to the MC input for $\rm{J}/\psi$ [69].
The systematic uncertainties on the tracking efficiency in the MCH, the MTR
trigger efficiency and the matching between the MCH and MTR are evaluated
comparing single muon data and MC, as described in Ref. [78]. The differences
are then propagated to the dimuon case, being 4%, 2% and 1% respectively for
the $\rm{J}/\psi$ [69]. This results in a 4.6% acceptance-times-efficiency
uncertainty for $\rm{J}/\psi$, and is propagated to a 9.2% uncertainty for
$\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs. The analysis requirement that all selected tracks in the
MCH should match track segments in the MTR removes any possible dependence on
which pair of tracks activated the trigger. Table 1 summarises the systematic
uncertainties on the measurement of the $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair production cross
section.

Table 1: Sources of systematic uncertainty on the $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair production cross section measurement.  Source | Uncertainty (%)
---|---
Signal extraction | 7.4
Acceptance-times-efficiency | 9.2
$B({\rm J}/\psi\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ | 1.1
Luminosity | 3.3
Total | 12.3

##  4 Results

The inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair production cross section in the kinematic
interval $2.5<y<4.0$ and $p_{\rm T}>0$ is measured to be

$\sigma({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm J}/\psi)=10.3\pm 2.3\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm
1.3\,{\rm(syst.)}\,\,{\rm nb}.$

The ratio of the production cross section of the inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair
to that of the inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ is

$\frac{\sigma({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm J}/\psi)}{\sigma({\rm J}/\psi)}=(9.1\pm
2.0\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm 1.3\,{\rm(syst.)})\times 10^{-4}\,,$

considering ${\rm d}\sigma({\rm J}/\psi)/{\rm d}y=(7533.3\pm
26.7\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm 491.6\,{\rm(syst.)})$ nb for $p_{\rm T}>0$ and
$2.5<y<4.0$ [69], and assuming the systematic uncertainties to be
uncorrelated. Likewise, the ratio

$\frac{1}{2}\frac{\sigma({\rm J}/\psi)^{2}}{\sigma({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm
J}/\psi)}=6.2\pm\,1.4\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm 1.1\,{\rm(syst.)}\,\,{\rm mb},$

can be calculated and interpreted as an effective cross section, according to
Eq. (1). This interpretation assumes that all $\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs are produced
via DPS processes. The relative contribution of SPS and DPS processes to
$\rm{J}/\psi$ pair production is a topic of debate and intense studies, see
e.g. Ref. [36]. In addition, the understanding of this ratio gets challenged
by the contribution of both the prompt and non-prompt components to the
measured inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ cross section, where the non-prompt
contribution originates from beauty-hadron decays.

The contamination from beauty-hadron decays to the $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair cross
section is evaluated to get a grasp of its influence to the measurement
according to

$\sigma_{\rm non-prompt}({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm J}/\psi)=\sigma_{{\rm
b}\overline{\rm b}}^{\rm total}\times\alpha\times
B^{2}(h_{b}\rightarrow\rm{J}/\psi\ \ +X)\,.$

The total beauty-hadron production cross section was measured to be

$\sigma_{{\rm b}\overline{\rm b}}^{\rm total}=502\pm 16~{}{\rm(stat.)}\pm
51~{}{\rm(syst.)}_{-3}^{+2}~{}{\rm(extr.)}~{}\mu\text{b}$

in Ref. [79]. The branching ratio of a beauty hadron into a $\rm{J}/\psi$ is
$B(h_{b}\rightarrow\rm{J}/\psi+X)=(1.16\pm 0.10)\%$ [70], and the acceptance
correction factor $\alpha$ is estimated using PYTHIA 8.3 [80] simulations.
Beauty hadrons are simulated according to three different configurations and
forced to decay into $\rm{J}/\psi$. The three configurations use the Monash
2013 tune for the calculation [81]. Two of them also include a tuning of the
parameters to get a good agreement with the NLO calculation by Mangano, Nason,
and Ridolfi for the ${\rm b}\overline{\rm b}$ single and double differential
distributions [82]. The difference between the latter two is that one of them
adds the ATLAS tune settings for multiple parton interactions [83]. The
$\alpha$ factor is obtained from the ratio of the $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair counts in
the acceptance to the number of all $\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs in the simulation. The
value of $\alpha=0.044^{+0.005}_{-0.007}$ is determined as the average of the
factors obtained with all configurations, and the systematic uncertainty is
conservatively set to the full spread of the values. This gives a non-prompt
contribution of

$\sigma_{\text{non-prompt}}({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm
J}/\psi)=2.97\pm\,0.09\,{\rm(stat.)}^{+0.68}_{-0.76}{\rm(syst.)}\,\,{\rm nb},$

and correspondingly the prompt $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair cross section is

$\sigma_{\rm prompt}({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm J}/\psi)=\sigma({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm
J}/\psi)-\sigma_{\text{non-prompt}}({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm
J}/\psi)=7.3\pm\,1.7\,{\rm(stat.)}^{+1.9}_{-2.1}{\rm(syst.)}\,\,{\rm nb}.$

Analogously, for the single $\rm{J}/\psi$ case, the computed extrapolation
factor to account for the number of $\rm{J}/\psi$ from beauty decays in the
acceptance is $\beta=0.121^{+0.001}_{-0.002}$. Thus, the non-prompt
contribution to the $\rm{J}/\psi$ production cross section is

$\sigma_{\text{non-prompt}}({\rm J}/\psi)=2\times\sigma_{{\rm b}\overline{\rm
b}}^{\rm total}\times\beta\times B(h_{\rm b}\rightarrow\rm{J}/\psi\ \
+X)=1.41\pm\,0.04\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm 0.19{\rm(syst.)}\,\,\mu{\rm b},$

and the prompt component is evaluated to be

$\sigma_{\rm prompt}({\rm J}/\psi)=\sigma({\rm J}/\psi)-\sigma_{\text{non-
prompt}}({\rm
J}/\psi)=9.89\pm\,0.32\,{\rm(stat.)}^{+1.47}_{-1.48}{\rm(syst.)}\,\,\mu{\rm
b}.$

Therefore, the ratios discussed earlier in this section can be evaluated for
the prompt case. The ratio of the prompt $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair production cross
section to that of $\rm{J}/\psi$ equals

$\frac{\sigma_{\rm prompt}({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm J}/\psi)}{\sigma_{\rm
prompt}({\rm J}/\psi)}=(7.4\pm 1.7\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm 2.2\,{\rm(syst.)})\times
10^{-4}\,,$

and the ratio related to the effective DPS cross section becomes

$\frac{1}{2}\frac{\sigma_{\rm prompt}({\rm J}/\psi)^{2}}{\sigma_{\rm
prompt}({\rm J}/\psi\,\,{\rm J}/\psi)}=6.7\pm 1.6\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm
2.7\,{\rm(syst.)}\,\,{\rm mb}.$

A differential measurement of the prompt $\rm{J}/\psi$ pair production cross
section and the corresponding ratios were previously reported by the LHCb
collaboration in a slightly different kinematic interval, $2.0<y<4.5$ and
$p_{\rm T}<10$ GeV/$c$ [46, 36]. The results presented here are in agreement
with the LHCb ones within uncertainties.

Despite the caveat caused by the calculation of this effective value
considering both the SPS and DPS contributions to the production cross
section, this value is consistent with the values obtained from quarkonium-
pair production measurements, with $\sigma_{\rm eff}$ values ranging from 2.2
to 12.5 mb [22, 35, 36, 37], and with the values obtained for quarkonium
associated production at central rapidity (in the range 2.3–6.1 mb) [38, 39,
59]. It is smaller than the values obtained for associated heavy-flavour
production at large rapidity by LHCb (ranging from 12.8 to 18.0 mb) [23, 27],
or those from jet or electroweak associated production (whose values are
between 12.0 and 21.3 mb) [40, 20, 18, 41, 25, 24, 42].

##  5 Conclusion

The production cross section of $\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs at large rapidity in pp
collisions at $\sqrt{s}~{}=~{}13$ TeV was studied by ALICE. The measurement
exploits the full Run 2 data sample collected by ALICE. The production cross
section of inclusive $\rm{J}/\psi$ pairs is reported to be $10.3\pm
2.3\,{\rm(stat.)}\pm 1.3\,{\rm(syst.)}$ nb, for $\rm{J}/\psi$ in the rapidity
interval $2.5<y<4.0$ and for $p_{\rm T}>0$. The results are compatible with
analogous measurements performed by the LHCb collaboration in a similar
kinematic interval [46, 36].

The Run 3 data taking, with the upgraded ALICE detector and the larger
accumulated luminosity [84], will allow us to perform this measurement with
increased precision and separating the prompt and non-prompt contributions.
This will also enable studying the kinematics of these events and probe model
calculations.

## Acknowledgements

The ALICE Collaboration would like to thank all its engineers and technicians for their invaluable contributions to the construction of the experiment and the CERN accelerator teams for the outstanding performance of the LHC complex. The ALICE Collaboration gratefully acknowledges the resources and support provided by all Grid centres and the Worldwide LHC Computing Grid (WLCG) collaboration. The ALICE Collaboration acknowledges the following funding agencies for their support in building and running the ALICE detector: A. I. Alikhanyan National Science Laboratory (Yerevan Physics Institute) Foundation (ANSL), State Committee of Science and World Federation of Scientists (WFS), Armenia; Austrian Academy of Sciences, Austrian Science Fund (FWF): [M 2467-N36] and Nationalstiftung für Forschung, Technologie und Entwicklung, Austria; Ministry of Communications and High Technologies, National Nuclear Research Center, Azerbaijan; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos (Finep), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) and Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Brazil; Bulgarian Ministry of Education and Science, within the National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures 2020¿2027 (object CERN), Bulgaria; Ministry of Education of China (MOEC) , Ministry of Science & Technology of China (MSTC) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), China; Ministry of Science and Education and Croatian Science Foundation, Croatia; Centro de Aplicaciones Tecnológicas y Desarrollo Nuclear (CEADEN), Cubaenergía, Cuba; Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic, Czech Republic; The Danish Council for Independent Research | Natural Sciences, the VILLUM FONDEN and Danish National Research Foundation (DNRF), Denmark; Helsinki Institute of Physics (HIP), Finland; Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique (CEA) and Institut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des Particules (IN2P3) and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), France; Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) and GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, Germany; General Secretariat for Research and Technology, Ministry of Education, Research and Religions, Greece; National Research, Development and Innovation Office, Hungary; Department of Atomic Energy Government of India (DAE), Department of Science and Technology, Government of India (DST), University Grants Commission, Government of India (UGC) and Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India; National Research and Innovation Agency - BRIN, Indonesia; Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN), Italy; Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) and Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI, Japan; Consejo Nacional de Ciencia (CONACYT) y Tecnología, through Fondo de Cooperación Internacional en Ciencia y Tecnología (FONCICYT) and Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Academico (DGAPA), Mexico; Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), Netherlands; The Research Council of Norway, Norway; Commission on Science and Technology for Sustainable Development in the South (COMSATS), Pakistan; Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Peru; Ministry of Education and Science, National Science Centre and WUT ID-UB, Poland; Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information and National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), Republic of Korea; Ministry of Education and Scientific Research, Institute of Atomic Physics, Ministry of Research and Innovation and Institute of Atomic Physics and University Politehnica of Bucharest, Romania; Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic, Slovakia; National Research Foundation of South Africa, South Africa; Swedish Research Council (VR) and Knut & Alice Wallenberg Foundation (KAW), Sweden; European Organization for Nuclear Research, Switzerland; Suranaree University of Technology (SUT), National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), Thailand Science Research and Innovation (TSRI) and National Science, Research and Innovation Fund (NSRF), Thailand; Turkish Energy, Nuclear and Mineral Research Agency (TENMAK), Turkey; National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Ukraine; Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), United Kingdom; National Science Foundation of the United States of America (NSF) and United States Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Physics (DOE NP), United States of America. In addition, individual groups or members have received support from: European Research Council, Strong 2020 - Horizon 2020 (grant nos. 950692, 824093), European Union; Academy of Finland (Center of Excellence in Quark Matter) (grant nos. 346327, 346328), Finland; Programa de Apoyos para la Superación del Personal Académico, UNAM, Mexico.

## References

  * [1] J. D. Bjorken and E. A. Paschos, “Inelastic Electron Proton and gamma Proton Scattering, and the Structure of the Nucleon”, Phys. Rev. 185 (1969) 1975–1982.
  * [2] F. Takagi, “Multiple Production of Quark Jets Off Nuclei”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979) 1296.
  * [3] C. Goebel, F. Halzen, and D. M. Scott, “Double Drell-Yan Annihilations in Hadron Collisions: Novel Tests of the Constituent Picture”, Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 2789.
  * [4] R. Kirschner, “Generalized Lipatov-Altarelli-Parisi Equations and Jet Calculus Rules”, Phys. Lett. B 84 (1979) 266–270.
  * [5] V. P. Shelest, A. M. Snigirev, and G. M. Zinovev, “The Multiparton Distribution Equations in QCD”, Phys. Lett. B 113 (1982) 325.
  * [6] M. Mekhfi, “Correlations in Color and Spin in Multiparton Processes”, Phys. Rev. D 32 (1985) 2380.
  * [7] N. Paver and D. Treleani, “Multi - Quark Scattering and Large $p_{T}$ Jet Production in Hadronic Collisions”, Nuovo Cim. A 70 (1982) 215.
  * [8] N. Paver and D. Treleani, “Multiple Parton Interactions and Multi - Jet Events at Collider and Tevatron Energies”, Phys. Lett. B 146 (1984) 252–256.
  * [9] M. Mekhfi, “Multiparton processes: an application to double Drell-Yan”, Phys. Rev. D 32 (1985) 2371.
  * [10] B. Humpert, “Are there multi - quark interactions?”, Phys. Lett. B 131 (1983) 461–467.
  * [11] B. Humpert, “The production of gauge boson pairs by p anti-p colliders”, Phys. Lett. B 135 (1984) 179–186.
  * [12] B. Humpert and R. Odorico, “Multiparton Scattering and QCD Radiation as Sources of Four Jet Events”, Phys. Lett. B 154 (1985) 211.
  * [13] L. Ametller, N. Paver, and D. Treleani, “Possible Signature of Multiple Parton Interactions in Collider Four Jet Events”, Phys. Lett. B 169 (1986) 289–292.
  * [14] F. Halzen, P. Hoyer, and W. J. Stirling, “Evidence for Multiple Parton Interactions From the Observation of Multi - Muon Events in Drell-Yan Experiments”, Phys. Lett. B 188 (1987) 375–378.
  * [15] R. M. Godbole, S. Gupta, and J. Lindfors, “Doudlbe parton scattering contribution to W + jets”, Z. Phys. C 47 (1990) 69–74.
  * [16] Axial Field Spectrometer Collaboration, T. Åkesson et al., “Double Parton Scattering in $pp$ Collisions at $\sqrt{s}=63$ GeV”, Z. Phys. C 34 (1987) 163.
  * [17] UA2 Collaboration, J. Alitti et al., “A Study of multi - jet events at the CERN anti-p p collider and a search for double parton scattering”, Phys. Lett. B 268 (1991) 145–154.
  * [18] CDF Collaboration, F. Abe et al., “Study of four jet events and evidence for double parton interactions in $p\bar{p}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=1.8$ TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 47 (1993) 4857–4871.
  * [19] CDF Collaboration, F. Abe et al., “Measurement of double parton scattering in $\bar{p}p$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=1.8$ TeV”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 584–589.
  * [20] D0 Collaboration, V. M. Abazov et al., “Double parton interactions in $\gamma$+3 jet events in $pp^{-}$ bar collisions $\sqrt{s}=1.96$ TeV.”, Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 052012, arXiv:0912.5104 [hep-ex].
  * [21] D0 Collaboration, V. M. Abazov et al., “Double Parton Interactions in $\gamma+3$ Jet and $\gamma+b/cjet+2$ Jet Events in $p\bar{p}$ Collisions at $\sqrt{s}=1.96$ TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 072006, arXiv:1402.1550 [hep-ex].
  * [22] D0 Collaboration, V. M. Abazov et al., “Observation and Studies of Double $J/\psi$ Production at the Tevatron”, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 111101, arXiv:1406.2380 [hep-ex].
  * [23] LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Observation of double charm production involving open charm in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV”, JHEP 06 (2012) 141, arXiv:1205.0975 [hep-ex]. [Addendum: JHEP 03, 108 (2014)].
  * [24] ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., “Measurement of hard double-parton interactions in $W(\to l\nu)$\+ 2 jet events at $\sqrt{s}$=7 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, New J. Phys. 15 (2013) 033038, arXiv:1301.6872 [hep-ex].
  * [25] CMS Collaboration, S. Chatrchyan et al., “Study of Double Parton Scattering Using W + 2-Jet Events in Proton-Proton Collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV”, JHEP 03 (2014) 032, arXiv:1312.5729 [hep-ex].
  * [26] ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., “Observation and measurements of the production of prompt and non-prompt $J/\psi$ mesons in association with a $Z$ boson in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 229, arXiv:1412.6428 [hep-ex].
  * [27] LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Production of associated Y and open charm hadrons in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ and 8 TeV via double parton scattering”, JHEP 07 (2016) 052, arXiv:1510.05949 [hep-ex].
  * [28] ALICE Collaboration, “The ALICE experiment – A journey through QCD”, arXiv:2211.04384 [nucl-ex].
  * [29] B. Blok, Y. Dokshitser, L. Frankfurt, and M. Strikman, “pQCD physics of multiparton interactions”, Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 1963, arXiv:1106.5533 [hep-ph].
  * [30] M. Diehl, D. Ostermeier, and A. Schafer, “Elements of a theory for multiparton interactions in QCD”, JHEP 03 (2012) 089, arXiv:1111.0910 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 03, 001 (2016)].
  * [31] J. R. Gaunt, “Glauber Gluons and Multiple Parton Interactions”, JHEP 07 (2014) 110, arXiv:1405.2080 [hep-ph].
  * [32] M. Diehl, T. Kasemets, and S. Keane, “Correlations in double parton distributions: effects of evolution”, JHEP 05 (2014) 118, arXiv:1401.1233 [hep-ph].
  * [33] J. R. Gaunt, R. Maciula, and A. Szczurek, “Conventional versus single-ladder-splitting contributions to double parton scattering production of two quarkonia, two Higgs bosons and $c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$”, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 054017, arXiv:1407.5821 [hep-ph].
  * [34] A. Del Fabbro and D. Treleani, “Scale factor in double parton collisions and parton densities in transverse space”, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 057901, arXiv:hep-ph/0005273.
  * [35] ATLAS Collaboration, M. Aaboud et al., “Measurement of the prompt J/ $\psi$ pair production cross-section in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV with the ATLAS detector”, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 76, arXiv:1612.02950 [hep-ex].
  * [36] LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Measurement of the J/$\psi$ pair production cross-section in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV”, JHEP 06 (2017) 047, arXiv:1612.07451 [hep-ex]. [Erratum: JHEP 10, 068 (2017)].
  * [37] D0 Collaboration, V. M. Abazov et al., “Evidence for simultaneous production of $J/\psi$ and $\Upsilon$ mesons”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 082002, arXiv:1511.02428 [hep-ex].
  * [38] J.-P. Lansberg and H.-S. Shao, “Phenomenological analysis of associated production of $Z^{0}+b$ in the $b\rightarrow J/\psi X$ decay channel at the LHC”, Nucl. Phys. B 916 (2017) 132–142, arXiv:1611.09303 [hep-ph].
  * [39] J.-P. Lansberg, H.-S. Shao, and N. Yamanaka, “Indication for double parton scatterings in $W+$ prompt $J/\psi$ production at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B 781 (2018) 485–491, arXiv:1707.04350 [hep-ph].
  * [40] CDF Collaboration, F. Abe et al., “Double parton scattering in $\bar{p}p$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=1.8$ TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 3811–3832.
  * [41] CMS Collaboration, V. Khachatryan et al., “Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements”, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 155, arXiv:1512.00815 [hep-ex].
  * [42] CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al., “Evidence for WW production from double-parton interactions in proton–proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13\,\text{TeV}$”, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 41, arXiv:1909.06265 [hep-ex].
  * [43] NA3 Collaboration, J. Badier et al., “Evidence for $\psi\psi$ Production in $\pi^{-}$ Interactions at 150 GeV/$c$ and 280 GeV/$c$”, Phys. Lett. B 114 (1982) 457–460.
  * [44] J. Badier et al., “$\psi\psi$ production and limits on beauty meson production from 400 GeV/$c$ protons”, Physics Letters B 158 (1985) 85–91.
  * [45] CMS Collaboration, V. Khachatryan et al., “Measurement of Prompt $J/\psi$ Pair Production in pp Collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV”, JHEP 09 (2014) 094, arXiv:1406.0484 [hep-ex].
  * [46] LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Observation of $J/\psi$ pair production in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”, Phys. Lett. B 707 (2012) 52–59, arXiv:1109.0963 [hep-ex].
  * [47] CMS Collaboration, V. Khachatryan et al., “Observation of $\Upsilon$(1S) pair production in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV”, JHEP 05 (2017) 013, arXiv:1610.07095 [hep-ex].
  * [48] ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., “Measurement of the production of a $W$ boson in association with a charm quark in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, JHEP 05 (2014) 068, arXiv:1402.6263 [hep-ex].
  * [49] LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Observation of associated production of a Z boson with a D meson in the forward region”, JHEP 04 (2014) 091, arXiv:1401.3245 [hep-ex].
  * [50] ATLAS Collaboration, M. Aaboud et al., “Study of hard double-parton scattering in four-jet events in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV with the ATLAS experiment”, JHEP 11 (2016) 110, arXiv:1608.01857 [hep-ex].
  * [51] D0 Collaboration, V. M. Abazov et al., “Study of double parton interactions in diphoton + dijet events in $p\bar{p}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=1.96$ TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 052008, arXiv:1512.05291 [hep-ex].
  * [52] CMS Collaboration, A. Tumasyan et al., “Observation of triple J/$\psi$ meson production in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV”, arXiv:2111.05370 [hep-ex].
  * [53] P. Ko, C. Yu, and J. Lee, “Inclusive double-quarkonium production at the Large Hadron Collider”, JHEP 01 (2011) 070, arXiv:1007.3095 [hep-ph].
  * [54] L.-P. Sun, H. Han, and K.-T. Chao, “Impact of $J/\psi$ pair production at the LHC and predictions in nonrelativistic QCD”, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 074033, arXiv:1404.4042 [hep-ph].
  * [55] S. P. Baranov and A. H. Rezaeian, “Prompt double $J/\psi$ production in proton-proton collisions at the LHC”, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 114011, arXiv:1511.04089 [hep-ph].
  * [56] J. P. Lansberg, “$J/\psi$ production at $\sqrt{s}=1.96$ and 7 TeV: Color-Singlet Model, NNLO* and polarisation”, J. Phys. G 38 (2011) 124110, arXiv:1107.0292 [hep-ph].
  * [57] J. M. Campbell, F. Maltoni, and F. Tramontano, “QCD corrections to J/psi and Upsilon production at hadron colliders”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 252002, arXiv:hep-ph/0703113.
  * [58] B. Gong and J.-X. Wang, “Next-to-leading-order QCD corrections to $J/\psi$ polarization at Tevatron and Large-Hadron-Collider energies”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 232001, arXiv:0802.3727 [hep-ph].
  * [59] J.-P. Lansberg, “New Observables in Inclusive Production of Quarkonia”, Phys. Rept. 889 (2020) 1–106, arXiv:1903.09185 [hep-ph].
  * [60] G. T. Bodwin, E. Braaten, and G. P. Lepage, “Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium”, Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 1125–1171, arXiv:hep-ph/9407339. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 55, 5853 (1997)].
  * [61] LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Measurement of $J/\psi$ polarization in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2631, arXiv:1307.6379 [hep-ex].
  * [62] LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Measurement of $\psi(2S)$ polarisation in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 2872, arXiv:1403.1339 [hep-ex].
  * [63] CMS Collaboration, S. Chatrchyan et al., “Measurement of the $Y(1S),Y(2S)$ and $Y(3S)$ Polarizations in $pp$ Collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 081802, arXiv:1209.2922 [hep-ex].
  * [64] CMS Collaboration, S. Chatrchyan et al., “Measurement of the Prompt $J/\psi$ and $\psi$(2S) Polarizations in $pp$ Collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV”, Phys. Lett. B 727 (2013) 381–402, arXiv:1307.6070 [hep-ex].
  * [65] ALICE Collaboration, B. Abelev et al., “$J/\psi$ polarization in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 082001, arXiv:1111.1630 [hep-ex].
  * [66] ALICE Collaboration, K. Aamodt et al., “The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC”, JINST 3 (2008) S08002.
  * [67] ALICE Collaboration, B. B. Abelev et al., “Performance of the ALICE Experiment at the CERN LHC”, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 29 (2014) 1430044, arXiv:1402.4476 [nucl-ex].
  * [68] ALICE Collaboration, K. Aamodt et al., “Rapidity and transverse momentum dependence of inclusive J$/\psi$ production in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”, Phys. Lett. B 704 (2011) 442–455, arXiv:1105.0380 [hep-ex]. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 718, 692–698 (2012)].
  * [69] ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Energy dependence of forward-rapidity $\mathrm{J}/\psi$ and $\psi\mathrm{(2S)}$ production in pp collisions at the LHC”, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 392, arXiv:1702.00557 [hep-ex].
  * [70] Particle Data Group Collaboration, R. L. Workman and Others, “Review of Particle Physics”, PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01.
  * [71] ALICE Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “Inclusive quarkonium production at forward rapidity in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 184, arXiv:1509.08258 [hep-ex].
  * [72] ALICE Collaboration, “Quarkonium signal extraction in ALICE”, ALICE-PUBLIC-2015-006. https://cds.cern.ch/record/2060096.
  * [73] D. J. Lange, “The EvtGen particle decay simulation package”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 462 (2001) 152–155.
  * [74] E. Barberio and Z. Was, “PHOTOS: A Universal Monte Carlo for QED radiative corrections. Version 2.0”, Comput. Phys. Commun. 79 (1994) 291–308.
  * [75] R. Brun, F. Bruyant, F. Carminati, S. Giani, M. Maire, A. McPherson, G. Patrick, and L. Urban, “GEANT: Detector Description and Simulation Tool; Oct 1994”,. https://cds.cern.ch/record/1082634. Long Writeup W5013.
  * [76] ALICE Collaboration, “Measurement of $\psi$(2S) production as a function of charged-particle pseudorapidity density in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV and p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV with ALICE at the LHC”, arXiv:2204.10253 [nucl-ex].
  * [77] ALICE Collaboration, “ALICE 2016-2017-2018 luminosity determination for pp collisions at $\mathbf{\sqrt{{\textit{s}}}}$ = 13 TeV”, ALICE-PUBLIC-2021-005. https://cds.cern.ch/record/2776672.
  * [78] ALICE Collaboration, B. B. Abelev et al., “Measurement of quarkonium production at forward rapidity in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 2974, arXiv:1403.3648 [nucl-ex].
  * [79] ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Prompt and non-prompt J/$\psi$ production cross sections at midrapidity in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}$ = 5.02 and 13 TeV”, JHEP 03 (2022) 190, arXiv:2108.02523 [nucl-ex].
  * [80] C. Bierlich et al., “A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3”, arXiv:2203.11601 [hep-ph].
  * [81] P. Skands, S. Carrazza, and J. Rojo, “Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 Tune”, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 3024, arXiv:1404.5630 [hep-ph].
  * [82] M. L. Mangano, P. Nason, and G. Ridolfi, “Heavy quark correlations in hadron collisions at next-to-leading order”, Nucl. Phys. B 373 (1992) 295–345.
  * [83] ATLAS Collaboration, “ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes to 7 TeV data”, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-021. https://cds.cern.ch/record/1966419.
  * [84] ALICE Collaboration, “ALICE upgrades during the LHC Long Shutdown 2”, arXiv:2302.01238 [physics.ins-det].

##  Appendix A The ALICE Collaboration

S. Acharya 125, D. Adamová 86, A. Adler69, G. Aglieri Rinella 32, M. Agnello
29, N. Agrawal 50, Z. Ahammed 132, S. Ahmad 15, S.U. Ahn 70, I. Ahuja 37, A.
Akindinov 140, M. Al-Turany 97, D. Aleksandrov 140, B. Alessandro 55, H.M.
Alfanda 6, R. Alfaro Molina 66, B. Ali 15, A. Alici 25, N. Alizadehvandchali
114, A. Alkin 32, J. Alme 20, G. Alocco 51, T. Alt 63, I. Altsybeev 140, M.N.
Anaam 6, C. Andrei 45, A. Andronic 135, V. Anguelov94, F. Antinori 53, P.
Antonioli 50, N. Apadula 74, L. Aphecetche 103, H. Appelshäuser 63, C. Arata
73, S. Arcelli 25, M. Aresti 51, R. Arnaldi 55, J.G.M.C.A. Arneiro 110, I.C.
Arsene 19, M. Arslandok 137, A. Augustinus 32, R. Averbeck 97, S. Aziz 72,
M.D. Azmi 15, A. Badalà 52, J. Bae 104, Y.W. Baek 40, X. Bai 118, R. Bailhache
63, Y. Bailung 47, A. Balbino 29, A. Baldisseri 128, B. Balis 2, D. Banerjee
4, Z. Banoo 91, R. Barbera 26, F. Barile 31, L. Barioglio 95, M. Barlou78,
G.G. Barnaföldi 136, L.S. Barnby 85, V. Barret 125, L. Barreto 110, C. Bartels
117, K. Barth 32, E. Bartsch 63, N. Bastid 125, S. Basu 75, G. Batigne 103, D.
Battistini 95, B. Batyunya 141, D. Bauri46, J.L. Bazo Alba 101, I.G. Bearden
83, C. Beattie 137, P. Becht 97, D. Behera 47, I. Belikov 127, A.D.C. Bell
Hechavarria 135, F. Bellini 25, R. Bellwied 114, S. Belokurova 140, G. Bencedi
136, S. Beole 24, A. Bercuci 45, Y. Berdnikov 140, A. Berdnikova 94, L.
Bergmann 94, M.G. Besoiu 62, L. Betev 32, P.P. Bhaduri 132, A. Bhasin 91, M.A.
Bhat 4, B. Bhattacharjee 41, L. Bianchi 24, N. Bianchi 48, J. Bielčík 35, J.
Bielčíková 86, J. Biernat 107, A.P. Bigot 127, A. Bilandzic 95, G. Biro 136,
S. Biswas 4, N. Bize 103, J.T. Blair 108, D. Blau 140, M.B. Blidaru 97, N.
Bluhme38, C. Blume 63, G. Boca 21,54, F. Bock 87, T. Bodova 20, A.
Bogdanov140, S. Boi 22, J. Bok 57, L. Boldizsár 136, M. Bombara 37, P.M. Bond
32, G. Bonomi 131,54, H. Borel 128, A. Borissov 140, H. Bossi 137, E. Botta
24, Y.E.M. Bouziani 63, L. Bratrud 63, P. Braun-Munzinger 97, M. Bregant 110,
M. Broz 35, G.E. Bruno 96,31, M.D. Buckland 23, D. Budnikov140, H. Buesching
63, S. Bufalino 29, P. Buhler 102, Z. Buthelezi 67,121, A. Bylinkin 20, S.A.
Bysiak107, M. Cai 6, H. Caines 137, A. Caliva 28, E. Calvo Villar 101, J.M.M.
Camacho 109, P. Camerini 23, F.D.M. Canedo 110, M. Carabas 124, A.A. Carballo
32, A.G.B. Carcamo 94, F. Carnesecchi 32, R. Caron 126, L.A.D. Carvalho 110,
J. Castillo Castellanos 128, F. Catalano 32,24, C. Ceballos Sanchez 141, I.
Chakaberia 74, P. Chakraborty 46, S. Chandra 132, S. Chapeland 32, M. Chartier
117, S. Chattopadhyay 132, S. Chattopadhyay 99, T.G. Chavez 44, T. Cheng 97,6,
C. Cheshkov 126, B. Cheynis 126, V. Chibante Barroso 32, D.D. Chinellato 111,
E.S. Chizzali 95, J. Cho 57, S. Cho 57, P. Chochula 32, P. Christakoglou 84,
C.H. Christensen 83, P. Christiansen 75, T. Chujo 123, M. Ciacco 29, C. Cicalo
51, F. Cindolo 50, M.R. Ciupek97, G. ClaiII,50, F. Colamaria 49, J.S.
Colburn100, D. Colella 96,31, M. Colocci 25, G. Conesa Balbastre 73, Z. Conesa
del Valle 72, G. Contin 23, J.G. Contreras 35, M.L. Coquet 128, T.M.
CormierI,87, P. Cortese 130,55, M.R. Cosentino 112, F. Costa 32, S. Costanza
21,54, C. Cot 72, J. Crkovská 94, P. Crochet 125, R. Cruz-Torres 74, P. Cui 6,
A. Dainese 53, M.C. Danisch 94, A. Danu 62, P. Das 80, P. Das 4, S. Das 4,
A.R. Dash 135, S. Dash 46, A. De Caro 28, G. de Cataldo 49, J. de Cuveland38,
A. De Falco 22, D. De Gruttola 28, N. De Marco 55, C. De Martin 23, S. De
Pasquale 28, R. Deb131, S. Deb 47, K.R. Deja133, R. Del Grande 95, L. Dello
Stritto 28, W. Deng 6, P. Dhankher 18, D. Di Bari 31, A. Di Mauro 32, B. Diab
128, R.A. Diaz 141,7, T. Dietel 113, Y. Ding 6, R. Divià 32, D.U. Dixit 18, Ø.
Djuvsland20, U. Dmitrieva 140, A. Dobrin 62, B. Dönigus 63, J.M. Dubinski133,
A. Dubla 97, S. Dudi 90, P. Dupieux 125, M. Durkac106, N. Dzalaiova12, T.M.
Eder 135, R.J. Ehlers 74, F. Eisenhut 63, D. Elia 49, B. Erazmus 103, F.
Ercolessi 25, F. Erhardt 89, M.R. Ersdal20, B. Espagnon 72, G. Eulisse 32, D.
Evans 100, S. Evdokimov 140, L. Fabbietti 95, M. Faggin 27, J. Faivre 73, F.
Fan6, W. Fan 74, A. Fantoni 48, M. Fasel 87, P. Fecchio29, A. Feliciello 55,
G. Feofilov 140, A. Fernández Téllez 44, L. Ferrandi 110, M.B. Ferrer 32, A.
Ferrero 128, C. Ferrero 55, A. Ferretti 24, V.J.G. Feuillard 94, V. Filova35,
D. Finogeev 140, F.M. Fionda 51, F. Flor 114, A.N. Flores 108, S. Foertsch 67,
I. Fokin 94, S. Fokin 140, E. Fragiacomo 56, E. Frajna 136, U. Fuchs 32, N.
Funicello 28, C. Furget73, A. Furs 140, T. Fusayasu 98, J.J. Gaardhøje 83, M.
Gagliardi 24, A.M. Gago 101, C.D. Galvan 109, D.R. Gangadharan 114, P. Ganoti
78, C. Garabatos 97, J.R.A. Garcia44, E. Garcia-Solis 9, C. Gargiulo 32, A.
Garibli81, K. Garner135, P. Gasik 97, A. Gautam 116, M.B. Gay Ducati 65, M.
Germain 103, A. Ghimouz123, C. Ghosh132, M. Giacalone 50,25, P. Giubellino
97,55, P. Giubilato 27, A.M.C. Glaenzer 128, P. Glässel 94, E. Glimos120,
D.J.Q. Goh76, V. Gonzalez 134, S. Gorbunov38, M. Gorgon 2, K. Goswami 47, S.
Gotovac33, V. Grabski 66, L.K. Graczykowski 133, E. Grecka 86, A. Grelli 58,
C. Grigoras 32, V. Grigoriev140, S. Grigoryan 141,1, F. Grosa 32, J.F. Grosse-
Oetringhaus 32, R. Grosso 97, D. Grund 35, G.G. Guardiano 111, R. Guernane 73,
M. Guilbaud 103, K. Gulbrandsen 83, T. Gundem 63, T. Gunji 122, W. Guo 6, A.
Gupta 91, R. Gupta 91, R. Gupta 47, S.P. Guzman44, K. Gwizdziel 133, L. Gyulai
136, M.K. Habib97, C. Hadjidakis 72, F.U. Haider 91, H. Hamagaki 76, A. Hamdi
74, M. Hamid6, Y. Han 138, B.G. Hanley 134, R. Hannigan 108, J. Hansen 75,
M.R. Haque 133, J.W. Harris 137, A. Harton 9, H. Hassan 87, D. Hatzifotiadou
50, P. Hauer 42, L.B. Havener 137, S.T. Heckel 95, E. Hellbär 97, H. Helstrup
34, M. Hemmer 63, T. Herman 35, G. Herrera Corral 8, F. Herrmann135, S.
Herrmann 126, K.F. Hetland 34, B. Heybeck 63, H. Hillemanns 32, B. Hippolyte
127, F.W. Hoffmann 69, B. Hofman 58, B. Hohlweger 84, G.H. Hong 138, M. Horst
95, A. Horzyk 2, Y. Hou6, P. Hristov 32, C. Hughes 120, P. Huhn63, L.M. Huhta
115, T.J. Humanic 88, L.A. Husova 135, A. Hutson 114, R. Ilkaev140, H. Ilyas
13, M. Inaba 123, G.M. Innocenti 32, M. Ippolitov 140, A. Isakov 86, T.
Isidori 116, M.S. Islam 99, M. Ivanov12, M. Ivanov97, V. Ivanov 140, K.E.
Iversen 75, M. Jablonski 2, B. Jacak74, N. Jacazio 25, P.M. Jacobs 74, S.
Jadlovska106, J. Jadlovsky106, S. Jaelani 82, C. Jahnke111, M.J. Jakubowska
133, M.A. Janik 133, T. Janson69, M. Jercic89, S. Ji 16, S. Jia10, A.A.P.
Jimenez 64, F. Jonas 87, J.M. Jowett 32,97, J. Jung 63, M. Jung 63, A. Junique
32, A. Jusko 100, M.J. Kabus 32,133, J. Kaewjai105, P. Kalinak 59, A.S.
Kalteyer 97, A. Kalweit 32, V. Kaplin 140, A. Karasu Uysal 71, D. Karatovic
89, O. Karavichev 140, T. Karavicheva 140, P. Karczmarczyk 133, E. Karpechev
140, U. Kebschull 69, R. Keidel 139, D.L.D. Keijdener58, M. Keil 32, B. Ketzer
42, S.S. Khade 47, A.M. Khan 6, S. Khan 15, A. Khanzadeev 140, Y. Kharlov 140,
A. Khatun 116, A. Khuntia 107, M.B. Kidson113, B. Kileng 34, B. Kim 104, C.
Kim 16, D.J. Kim 115, E.J. Kim 68, J. Kim 138, J.S. Kim 40, J. Kim 57, J. Kim
68, M. Kim 18, S. Kim 17, T. Kim 138, K. Kimura 92, S. Kirsch 63, I. Kisel 38,
S. Kiselev 140, A. Kisiel133, J.P. Kitowski 2, J.L. Klay 5, J. Klein 32, S.
Klein 74, C. Klein-Bösing 135, M. Kleiner 63, T. Klemenz 95, A. Kluge 32, A.G.
Knospe 114, C. Kobdaj 105, T. Kollegger97, A. Kondratyev 141, N. Kondratyeva
140, E. Kondratyuk140, J. Konig 63, S.A. Konigstorfer 95, P.J. Konopka 32, G.
Kornakov 133, S.D. Koryciak 2, A. Kotliarov 86, V. Kovalenko 140, M. Kowalski
107, V. Kozhuharov 36, I. Králik 59, A. Kravčáková 37, L. Krcal 32,38, M.
Krivda 100,59, F. Krizek 86, K. Krizkova Gajdosova 32, M. Kroesen 94, M.
Krüger 63, D.M. Krupova 35, E. Kryshen 140, V. Kučera 57, C. Kuhn 127, P.G.
Kuijer 84, T. Kumaoka123, D. Kumar132, L. Kumar 90, N. Kumar90, S. Kumar 31,
S. Kundu 32, P. Kurashvili 79, A. Kurepin 140, A.B. Kurepin 140, A.
Kuryakin140, S. Kushpil 86, J. Kvapil 100, M.J. Kweon 57, Y. Kwon 138, S.L. La
Pointe 38, P. La Rocca 26, A. Lakrathok105, M. Lamanna 32, R. Langoy 119, P.
Larionov 32, E. Laudi 32, L. Lautner 32,95, R. Lavicka 102, R. Lea 131,54, H.
Lee 104, I. Legrand 45, G. Legras 135, J. Lehrbach 38, T.M. Lelek2, R.C.
Lemmon 85, I. León Monzón 109, M.M. Lesch 95, E.D. Lesser 18, P. Lévai 136, X.
Li10, X.L. Li6, J. Lien 119, R. Lietava 100, I. Likmeta 114, B. Lim 24, S.H.
Lim 16, V. Lindenstruth 38, A. Lindner45, C. Lippmann 97, A. Liu 18, D.H. Liu
6, J. Liu 117, G.S.S. Liveraro111, I.M. Lofnes 20, C. Loizides 87, S. Lokos
107, J. Lomker 58, P. Loncar 33, J.A. Lopez 94, X. Lopez 125, E. López Torres
7, P. Lu 97,118, J.R. Luhder 135, M. Lunardon 27, G. Luparello 56, Y.G. Ma 39,
M. Mager 32, A. Maire 127, M.V. Makariev 36, M. Malaev 140, G. Malfattore 25,
N.M. Malik 91, Q.W. Malik19, S.K. Malik 91, L. Malinina VI,141, D. Mallick 80,
N. Mallick 47, G. Mandaglio 30,52, S.K. Mandal 79, V. Manko 140, F. Manso 125,
V. Manzari 49, Y. Mao 6, R.W. Marcjan 2, G.V. Margagliotti 23, A. Margotti 50,
A. Marín 97, C. Markert 108, P. Martinengo 32, M.I. Martínez 44, G. Martínez
García 103, M.P.P. Martins 110, S. Masciocchi 97, M. Masera 24, A. Masoni 51,
L. Massacrier 72, A. Mastroserio 129,49, O. Matonoha 75, S. Mattiazzo 27,
P.F.T. Matuoka110, A. Matyja 107, C. Mayer 107, A.L. Mazuecos 32, F. Mazzaschi
24, M. Mazzilli 32, J.E. Mdhluli 121, A.F. Mechler63, Y. Melikyan 43,140, A.
Menchaca-Rocha 66, E. Meninno 102,28, A.S. Menon 114, M. Meres 12, S.
Mhlanga113,67, Y. Miake123, L. Micheletti 32, L.C. Migliorin126, D.L. Mihaylov
95, K. Mikhaylov 141,140, A.N. Mishra 136, D. Miśkowiec 97, A. Modak 4, A.P.
Mohanty 58, B. Mohanty 80, M. Mohisin Khan III,15, M.A. Molander 43, Z.
Moravcova 83, C. Mordasini 95, D.A. Moreira De Godoy135, I. Morozov 140, A.
Morsch 32, T. Mrnjavac 32, V. Muccifora 48, S. Muhuri 132, J.D. Mulligan 74,
A. Mulliri22, M.G. Munhoz 110, R.H. Munzer 63, H. Murakami 122, S. Murray 113,
L. Musa 32, J. Musinsky 59, J.W. Myrcha133, B. Naik 121, A.I. Nambrath 18,
B.K. Nandi46, R. Nania 50, E. Nappi 49, A.F. Nassirpour 17,75, A. Nath 94, C.
Nattrass 120, M.N. Naydenov 36, A. Neagu19, A. Negru124, L. Nellen 64, G.
Neskovic 38, B.S. Nielsen 83, E.G. Nielsen 83, S. Nikolaev 140, S. Nikulin
140, V. Nikulin 140, F. Noferini 50, S. Noh 11, P. Nomokonov 141, J. Norman
117, N. Novitzky 123, P. Nowakowski 133, A. Nyanin 140, J. Nystrand 20, M.
Ogino76, A. Ohlson 75, V.A. Okorokov 140, J. Oleniacz 133, A.C. Oliveira Da
Silva 120, M.H. Oliver 137, A. Onnerstad 115, C. Oppedisano 55, A. Ortiz
Velasquez 64, J. Otwinowski 107, M. Oya92, K. Oyama 76, Y. Pachmayer 94, S.
Padhan46, D. Pagano 131,54, G. Paić 64, A. Palasciano 49, S. Panebianco 128,
H. Park 123, H. Park 104, J. Park 57, J.E. Parkkila 32, R.N. Patra91, B. Paul
22, H. Pei 6, T. Peitzmann 58, X. Peng 6, M. Pennisi 24, D. Peresunko 140,
G.M. Perez 7, S. Perrin 128, Y. Pestov140, V. Petrov 140, M. Petrovici 45,
R.P. Pezzi 103,65, S. Piano 56, M. Pikna 12, P. Pillot 103, O. Pinazza 50,32,
L. Pinsky114, C. Pinto 95, S. Pisano 48, M. Płoskoń 74, M. Planinic89, F.
Pliquett63, M.G. Poghosyan 87, B. Polichtchouk 140, S. Politano 29, N. Poljak
89, A. Pop 45, S. Porteboeuf-Houssais 125, V. Pozdniakov 141, I.Y. Pozos44,
K.K. Pradhan 47, S.K. Prasad 4, S. Prasad 47, R. Preghenella 50, F. Prino 55,
C.A. Pruneau 134, I. Pshenichnov 140, M. Puccio 32, S. Pucillo 24, Z.
Pugelova106, S. Qiu 84, L. Quaglia 24, R.E. Quishpe114, S. Ragoni 14, A.
Rakotozafindrabe 128, L. Ramello 130,55, F. Rami 127, S.A.R. Ramirez44, T.A.
Rancien73, M. Rasa 26, S.S. Räsänen 43, R. Rath 50, M.P. Rauch20, I. Ravasenga
84, K.F. Read 87,120, C. Reckziegel112, A.R. Redelbach 38, K. Redlich IV,79,
C.A. Reetz 97, A. Rehman20, F. Reidt 32, H.A. Reme-Ness 34, Z. Rescakova37, K.
Reygers 94, A. Riabov 140, V. Riabov 140, R. Ricci 28, M. Richter19, A.A.
Riedel 95, W. Riegler 32, C. Ristea 62, M.V. Rodriguez 32, M. Rodríguez
Cahuantzi 44, K. Røed 19, R. Rogalev 140, E. Rogochaya 141, T.S. Rogoschinski
63, D. Rohr 32, D. Röhrich 20, P.F. Rojas44, S. Rojas Torres 35, P.S. Rokita
133, G. Romanenko 141, F. Ronchetti 48, A. Rosano 30,52, E.D. Rosas64, K.
Roslon 133, A. Rossi 53, A. Roy 47, S. Roy46, N. Rubini 25, O.V. Rueda 114, D.
Ruggiano133, R. Rui 23, P.G. Russek 2, R. Russo 84, A. Rustamov 81, E.
Ryabinkin 140, Y. Ryabov 140, A. Rybicki 107, H. Rytkonen 115, J. Ryu 16, W.
Rzesa133, O.A.M. Saarimaki 43, R. Sadek 103, S. Sadhu 31, S. Sadovsky 140, J.
Saetre 20, K. Šafařík 35, P. Saha41, S.K. Saha 4, S. Saha 80, B. Sahoo 46, B.
Sahoo 47, R. Sahoo 47, S. Sahoo60, D. Sahu 47, P.K. Sahu 60, J. Saini 132, K.
Sajdakova37, S. Sakai 123, M.P. Salvan 97, S. Sambyal 91, I. Sanna 32,95, T.B.
Saramela110, D. Sarkar 134, N. Sarkar132, P. Sarma41, V. Sarritzu 22, V.M.
Sarti 95, M.H.P. Sas 137, J. Schambach 87, H.S. Scheid 63, C. Schiaua 45, R.
Schicker 94, A. Schmah94, C. Schmidt 97, H.R. Schmidt93, M.O. Schmidt 32, M.
Schmidt93, N.V. Schmidt 87, A.R. Schmier 120, R. Schotter 127, A. Schröter 38,
J. Schukraft 32, K. Schwarz97, K. Schweda 97, G. Scioli 25, E. Scomparin 55,
J.E. Seger 14, Y. Sekiguchi122, D. Sekihata 122, I. Selyuzhenkov 97, S.
Senyukov 127, J.J. Seo 57, D. Serebryakov 140, L. Šerkšnytė 95, A. Sevcenco
62, T.J. Shaba 67, A. Shabetai 103, R. Shahoyan32, A. Shangaraev 140, A.
Sharma90, B. Sharma 91, D. Sharma46, H. Sharma53,107, M. Sharma 91, S. Sharma
76, S. Sharma 91, U. Sharma 91, A. Shatat 72, O. Sheibani114, K. Shigaki 92,
M. Shimomura77, J. Shin11, S. Shirinkin 140, Q. Shou 39, Y. Sibiriak 140, S.
Siddhanta 51, T. Siemiarczuk 79, T.F. Silva 110, D. Silvermyr 75, T.
Simantathammakul105, R. Simeonov 36, B. Singh91, B. Singh 95, K. Singh 47, R.
Singh 80, R. Singh 91, R. Singh 47, S. Singh 15, V.K. Singh 132, V. Singhal
132, T. Sinha 99, B. Sitar 12, M. Sitta 130,55, T.B. Skaali19, G. Skorodumovs
94, M. Slupecki 43, N. Smirnov 137, R.J.M. Snellings 58, E.H. Solheim 19, J.
Song 114, A. Songmoolnak105, C. Sonnabend 32,97, F. Soramel 27, A.B. Soto-
hernandez88, R. Spijkers 84, I. Sputowska 107, J. Staa 75, J. Stachel 94, I.
Stan 62, P.J. Steffanic 120, S.F. Stiefelmaier 94, D. Stocco 103, I. Storehaug
19, P. Stratmann 135, S. Strazzi 25, C.P. Stylianidis84, A.A.P. Suaide 110, C.
Suire 72, M. Sukhanov 140, M. Suljic 32, R. Sultanov 140, V. Sumberia 91, S.
Sumowidagdo 82, S. Swain60, I. Szarka 12, M. Szymkowski133, S.F. Taghavi 95,
G. Taillepied 97, J. Takahashi 111, G.J. Tambave 80, S. Tang 6, Z. Tang 118,
J.D. Tapia Takaki V,116, N. Tapus124, M.G. Tarzila45, G.F. Tassielli 31, A.
Tauro 32, G. Tejeda Muñoz 44, A. Telesca 32, L. Terlizzi 24, C. Terrevoli 114,
S. Thakur 4, D. Thomas 108, A. Tikhonov 140, A.R. Timmins 114, M. Tkacik106,
T. Tkacik 106, A. Toia 63, R. Tokumoto92, N. Topilskaya 140, M. Toppi 48, T.
Tork 72, A.G. Torres Ramos 31, A. Trifiró 30,52, A.S. Triolo 32,30,52, S.
Tripathy 50, T. Tripathy 46, S. Trogolo 32, V. Trubnikov3, W.H. Trzaska 115,
T.P. Trzcinski 133, A. Tumkin140, R. Turrisi 53, T.S. Tveter 19, K. Ullaland
20, B. Ulukutlu 95, A. Uras 126, M. Urioni 54,131, G.L. Usai 22, M. Vala37, N.
Valle 21, L.V.R. van Doremalen58, M. van Leeuwen 84, C.A. van Veen 94, R.J.G.
van Weelden 84, P. Vande Vyvre 32, D. Varga 136, Z. Varga 136, M. Vasileiou
78, A. Vasiliev 140, O. Vázquez Doce 48, V. Vechernin 140, E. Vercellin 24, S.
Vergara Limón44, L. Vermunt 97, R. Vértesi 136, M. Verweij 58, L. Vickovic33,
Z. Vilakazi121, O. Villalobos Baillie 100, A. Villani 23, G. Vino 49, A.
Vinogradov 140, T. Virgili 28, M.M.O. Virta 115, V. Vislavicius75, A.
Vodopyanov 141, B. Volkel 32, M.A. Völkl 94, K. Voloshin140, S.A. Voloshin
134, G. Volpe 31, B. von Haller 32, I. Vorobyev 95, N. Vozniuk 140, J.
Vrláková 37, J. Wan39, C. Wang 39, D. Wang39, Y. Wang 39, A. Wegrzynek 32,
F.T. Weiglhofer38, S.C. Wenzel 32, J.P. Wessels 135, S.L. Weyhmiller 137, J.
Wiechula 63, J. Wikne 19, G. Wilk 79, J. Wilkinson 97, G.A. Willems135, B.
Windelband94, M. Winn 128, J.R. Wright 108, W. Wu39, Y. Wu 118, R. Xu 6, A.
Yadav 42, A.K. Yadav 132, S. Yalcin71, Y. Yamaguchi92, S. Yang20, S. Yano92,
Z. Yin 6, I.-K. Yoo 16, J.H. Yoon 57, H. Yu11, S. Yuan20, A. Yuncu 94, V.
Zaccolo 23, C. Zampolli 32, F. Zanone 94, N. Zardoshti 32, A. Zarochentsev
140, P. Závada 61, N. Zaviyalov140, M. Zhalov 140, B. Zhang 6, L. Zhang 39, S.
Zhang 39, X. Zhang 6, Y. Zhang118, Z. Zhang 6, M. Zhao 10, V. Zherebchevskii
140, Y. Zhi10, D. Zhou 6, Y. Zhou 83, J. Zhu 97,6, Y. Zhu6, S.C. Zugravel 55,
N. Zurlo 131,54

## Affiliation Notes

I Deceased
II Also at: Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and
Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA), Bologna, Italy
III Also at: Department of Applied Physics, Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh, India
IV Also at: Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Wroclaw, Poland
V Also at: University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, United States
VI Also at: An institution covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN

## Collaboration Institutes

1 A.I. Alikhanyan National Science Laboratory (Yerevan Physics Institute)
Foundation, Yerevan, Armenia
2 AGH University of Science and Technology, Cracow, Poland
3 Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics, National Academy of Sciences
of Ukraine, Kiev, Ukraine
4 Bose Institute, Department of Physics and Centre for Astroparticle Physics
and Space Science (CAPSS), Kolkata, India
5 California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California, United
States
6 Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China
7 Centro de Aplicaciones Tecnológicas y Desarrollo Nuclear (CEADEN), Havana,
Cuba
8 Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados (CINVESTAV), Mexico City and
Mérida, Mexico
9 Chicago State University, Chicago, Illinois, United States
10 China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing, China
11 Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Republic of Korea
12 Comenius University Bratislava, Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and
Informatics, Bratislava, Slovak Republic
13 COMSATS University Islamabad, Islamabad, Pakistan
14 Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, United States
15 Department of Physics, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India
16 Department of Physics, Pusan National University, Pusan, Republic of Korea
17 Department of Physics, Sejong University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
18 Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, California,
United States
19 Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
20 Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
21 Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy
22 Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Cagliari, Italy
23 Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Trieste, Italy
24 Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Turin, Italy
25 Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell’Università and Sezione INFN,
Bologna, Italy
26 Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell’Università and Sezione INFN,
Catania, Italy
27 Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell’Università and Sezione INFN,
Padova, Italy
28 Dipartimento di Fisica ‘E.R. Caianiello’ dell’Università and Gruppo
Collegato INFN, Salerno, Italy
29 Dipartimento DISAT del Politecnico and Sezione INFN, Turin, Italy
30 Dipartimento di Scienze MIFT, Università di Messina, Messina, Italy
31 Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica ‘M. Merlin’ and Sezione INFN, Bari,
Italy
32 European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
33 Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Naval
Architecture, University of Split, Split, Croatia
34 Faculty of Engineering and Science, Western Norway University of Applied
Sciences, Bergen, Norway
35 Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical Engineering, Czech Technical
University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
36 Faculty of Physics, Sofia University, Sofia, Bulgaria
37 Faculty of Science, P.J. Šafárik University, Košice, Slovak Republic
38 Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-
Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
39 Fudan University, Shanghai, China
40 Gangneung-Wonju National University, Gangneung, Republic of Korea
41 Gauhati University, Department of Physics, Guwahati, India
42 Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen- und Kernphysik, Rheinische Friedrich-
Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany
43 Helsinki Institute of Physics (HIP), Helsinki, Finland
44 High Energy Physics Group, Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico
45 Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering,
Bucharest, Romania
46 Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IIT), Mumbai, India
47 Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Indore, India
48 INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
49 INFN, Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
50 INFN, Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
51 INFN, Sezione di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
52 INFN, Sezione di Catania, Catania, Italy
53 INFN, Sezione di Padova, Padova, Italy
54 INFN, Sezione di Pavia, Pavia, Italy
55 INFN, Sezione di Torino, Turin, Italy
56 INFN, Sezione di Trieste, Trieste, Italy
57 Inha University, Incheon, Republic of Korea
58 Institute for Gravitational and Subatomic Physics (GRASP), Utrecht
University/Nikhef, Utrecht, Netherlands
59 Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice,
Slovak Republic
60 Institute of Physics, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Bhubaneswar, India
61 Institute of Physics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech
Republic
62 Institute of Space Science (ISS), Bucharest, Romania
63 Institut für Kernphysik, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt,
Frankfurt, Germany
64 Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México,
Mexico City, Mexico
65 Instituto de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS),
Porto Alegre, Brazil
66 Instituto de Física, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City,
Mexico
67 iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Somerset West, South Africa
68 Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju, Republic of Korea
69 Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe Universität Frankfurt Institut für Informatik,
Fachbereich Informatik und Mathematik, Frankfurt, Germany
70 Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Daejeon, Republic of
Korea
71 KTO Karatay University, Konya, Turkey
72 Laboratoire de Physique des 2 Infinis, Irène Joliot-Curie, Orsay, France
73 Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Grenoble-
Alpes, CNRS-IN2P3, Grenoble, France
74 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, United States
75 Lund University Department of Physics, Division of Particle Physics, Lund,
Sweden
76 Nagasaki Institute of Applied Science, Nagasaki, Japan
77 Nara Women’s University (NWU), Nara, Japan
78 National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Science,
Department of Physics , Athens, Greece
79 National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw, Poland
80 National Institute of Science Education and Research, Homi Bhabha National
Institute, Jatni, India
81 National Nuclear Research Center, Baku, Azerbaijan
82 National Research and Innovation Agency - BRIN, Jakarta, Indonesia
83 Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
84 Nikhef, National institute for subatomic physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
85 Nuclear Physics Group, STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, United Kingdom
86 Nuclear Physics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Husinec-Řež,
Czech Republic
87 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, United States
88 Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States
89 Physics department, Faculty of science, University of Zagreb, Zagreb,
Croatia
90 Physics Department, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
91 Physics Department, University of Jammu, Jammu, India
92 Physics Program and International Institute for Sustainability with Knotted
Chiral Meta Matter (SKCM2), Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan
93 Physikalisches Institut, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen, Tübingen,
Germany
94 Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg,
Germany
95 Physik Department, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
96 Politecnico di Bari and Sezione INFN, Bari, Italy
97 Research Division and ExtreMe Matter Institute EMMI, GSI Helmholtzzentrum
für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany
98 Saga University, Saga, Japan
99 Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kolkata,
India
100 School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham,
United Kingdom
101 Sección Física, Departamento de Ciencias, Pontificia Universidad Católica
del Perú, Lima, Peru
102 Stefan Meyer Institut für Subatomare Physik (SMI), Vienna, Austria
103 SUBATECH, IMT Atlantique, Nantes Université, CNRS-IN2P3, Nantes, France
104 Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon City, Republic of Korea
105 Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
106 Technical University of Košice, Košice, Slovak Republic
107 The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of
Sciences, Cracow, Poland
108 The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States
109 Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Culiacán, Mexico
110 Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil
111 Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil
112 Universidade Federal do ABC, Santo Andre, Brazil
113 University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
114 University of Houston, Houston, Texas, United States
115 University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland
116 University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, United States
117 University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
118 University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
119 University of South-Eastern Norway, Kongsberg, Norway
120 University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
121 University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
122 University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
123 University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
124 University Politehnica of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
125 Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
126 Université de Lyon, CNRS/IN2P3, Institut de Physique des 2 Infinis de
Lyon, Lyon, France
127 Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC UMR 7178, F-67000 Strasbourg, France,
Strasbourg, France
128 Université Paris-Saclay Centre d’Etudes de Saclay (CEA), IRFU, Départment
de Physique Nucléaire (DPhN), Saclay, France
129 Università degli Studi di Foggia, Foggia, Italy
130 Università del Piemonte Orientale, Vercelli, Italy
131 Università di Brescia, Brescia, Italy
132 Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kolkata,
India
133 Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland
134 Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, United States
135 Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Institut für Kernphysik,
Münster, Germany
136 Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
137 Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States
138 Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
139 Zentrum für Technologie und Transfer (ZTT), Worms, Germany
140 Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
141 Affiliated with an international laboratory covered by a cooperation
agreement with CERN.