HIN-16-023

$HeadURL:svn+ssh://svn.cern.ch/reps/tdr2/papers/HIN-16-023/trunk/HIN-16-023.tex$
$Id:HIN-16-023.tex4880212019-02-0100:59:58Zjaebeom$

HIN-16-023

# Measurement of nuclear modification factors of $\PgUa$, $\PgUb$, and $\PgUc$
mesons in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$

###### Abstract

The cross sections for $\PgU$(1S), $\PgU$(2S), and $\PgU$(3S) production in
lead-lead ($\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$) and proton-proton ($\Pp\Pp$) collisions
at $\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$ have been measured using the CMS detector at the LHC.
The nuclear modification factors, $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$, derived from the
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$-to-$\Pp\Pp$ ratio of yields for each state, are
studied as functions of meson rapidity and transverse momentum, as well as
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collision centrality. The yields of all three states
are found to be significantly suppressed, and compatible with a sequential
ordering of the suppression,
$R_{\mathrm{AA}}(\PgU\mathrm{(1S)})>R_{\mathrm{AA}}(\PgU\mathrm{(2S)})>R_{\mathrm{AA}}(\PgU\mathrm{(3S)})$.
The suppression of $\PgU$(1S) is larger than that seen at $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$,
although the two are compatible within uncertainties. The upper limit on the
$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ of integrated over , rapidity and centrality is 0.096 at 95%
confidence level, which is the strongest suppression observed for a quarkonium
state in heavy ion collisions to date.

##  0.1 Introduction

The measurement of quarkonium production in heavy ion collisions is one of the
most promising ways to study the properties of strongly interacting matter at
high energy density and temperature. It has been predicted that in such an
environment, a strongly interacting medium of deconfined quarks and gluons
(the quark-gluon plasma, QGP) is formed [1, 2]. Bottomonium states have been
the subject of studies in heavy ion collisions for several reasons. Bottomonia
are produced during the early stages of collisions via hard parton scattering.
Their spectral functions are modified as a consequence of Debye screening of
the heavy-quark potential at finite temperatures [3, 4], as well as by thermal
broadening of their widths due to interactions with gluons [5, 6]. These in-
medium effects have been studied in numerical simulations of quantum
chromodynamics (QCD) on a space-time lattice, and captured as real and
imaginary components of the heavy-quark potential [7]. One of the most
remarkable signatures of these interactions with the medium is the sequential
suppression of quarkonium states in heavy ion collisions compared to the
production in proton-proton ($\Pp\Pp$) collisions, both in the charmonium (, ,
$\chi_{\cPqc}$, etc.) and the bottomonium (, , , $\chi_{\cPqb}$, etc.)
families [8]. This scenario follows from the expectation that the suppression
of quarkonia is stronger for states with smaller binding energy. The
quarkonium yield can also increase in the presence of QGP, from the
recombination of uncorrelated quarks [9, 10, 11, 12]. However, recombination-
like processes for bottomonia are expected to be negligible compared to the
charmonium family [13, 14, 15], because these processes are driven by the
number of heavy-quark pairs present in a single event, which is much smaller
for beauty than for charm. The dissociation temperatures for the states, above
which suppression occurs, are expected to be correlated with their binding
energies, and are predicted to be $T_{\text{dissoc}}\approx 2T_{\mathrm{c}}$,
1.2$T_{\mathrm{c}}$ and 1$T_{\mathrm{c}}$ for the , , and states,
respectively, where $T_{\mathrm{c}}$ is the critical temperature for
deconfinement [16]. Therefore, measurements of the yields of each state can
provide information about the thermal properties of the medium during its hot
early phase.

Modifications of particle production in nucleus-nucleus ($\mathrm{AA}$)
collisions are quantified using the nuclear modification factor,
$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$, which is the ratio of the yield measured in $\mathrm{AA}$
to that in $\Pp\Pp$ collisions, scaled by the mean number of binary NN
collisions. Comparisons of the bottomonium data with dynamical models
incorporating the heavy-quark potential effects found in high-temperature
lattice QCD are thus expected to extend our understanding of the nature of
colour deconfinement in heavy ion collisions. Measurements of both the
charmonium ( and ) [17, 18, 19, 20] and bottomonium (, , and ) [21, 22]
families have been carried out at a nucleon-nucleon (NN) center-of-mass energy
of $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$ and, most recently, at $\sqrtsNN=0.2\TeV$ at RHIC [23,
24, 25]. At $\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$, measurements by the CMS Collaboration show
strong suppression of and mesons [26, 27], as well as of both and relative to
the ground state [28]. The suppression of the excited relative to the ground
state persists at very forward rapidity, $2.5<y<4$ [29]. These measurements
provide new constraints for theoretical models of the medium [9, 11].

In this Letter, we report measurements of the differential cross sections and
nuclear modification factors for , , and mesons using their decay into two
oppositely charged muons in lead-lead ($\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$) and $\Pp\Pp$
collisions at $\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$. Results are presented as functions of the
transverse momentum () and rapidity ($y$), as well as $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
collision centrality (, the degree of overlap of the two lead nuclei). The
data were collected with the CMS detector at the CERN LHC in 2015.

##  0.2 The CMS detector

The central feature of the CMS apparatus is a superconducting solenoid of 6m
internal diameter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8T. Within the solenoid
volume are a silicon tracker, a lead tungstate crystal electromagnetic
calorimeter, and a brass and scintillator hadron calorimeter, each composed of
a barrel and two endcap sections. Muons are detected in the pseudorapidity
interval of $\abs{\eta}<2.4$ using gas-ionization chambers made of three
technologies: drift tubes, cathode strip chambers, and resistive-plate
chambers. These are embedded in the steel flux-return yoke of the solenoid.
The silicon tracker is composed of pixel detectors followed by microstrip
detectors. The of muons matched to tracks reconstructed in the silicon
detector is measured with a resolution between 1% and 2% for typical muons
used in this analysis [30]. In addition, CMS has extensive forward
calorimetry, including two steel and quartz-fiber Cherenkov hadron forward
(HF) calorimeters that cover the range of $2.9<\abs{\eta}<5.2$. The HF
calorimeters are segmented into towers and the granularity is
$\Delta\eta\times\Delta\phi=0.175\times 0.175$ radians. These are used in the
present analysis to select $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collision events and to
define their centrality class. Centrality, defined as the fraction of the
total inelastic hadronic cross section with 0% representing collisions with
the largest overlap of the two nuclei, is determined experimentally using the
total energy in both HF calorimeters [31]. A more detailed description of the
CMS detector, together with a definition of the coordinate system and the
kinematic variables, can be found in Ref. [32].

##  0.3 Data selection and simulation samples

The mesons are identified using their dimuon decay channel. In both $\Pp\Pp$
and $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions, the dimuon events are selected by a
fast hardware-based trigger system, which requires two muon candidates in a
given bunch crossing with no explicit requirement on the muon momentum beyond
the intrinsic selection due to the acceptance coverage of the CMS muon
detectors. In $\Pp\Pp$ collisions, this trigger registered an integral
luminosity of 28.0. The $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ data were taken with two
triggers based on the same algorithm used for $\Pp\Pp$ data. The first mode,
designed to enhance the event count for muon pairs from peripheral events,
added an additional selection that the collision centrality be in the 30–100%
range. This trigger sampled the full integrated luminosity of 464. The second
mode, using just the $\Pp\Pp$ trigger alone, was prescaled during part of the
data taking and therefore sampled a smaller effective integrated luminosity of
368. Data taken with this latter trigger were used to analyze the yields in
the 0–30% and 0–100% centrality bins.

In order to keep hadronic collisions and reject beam-related background
processes (beam-gas collisions and beam scraping events), an offline event
selection is applied. Events are required to have at least one reconstructed
primary vertex. In $\Pp\Pp$ collisions at least 25% of the tracks have to pass
a tight track-quality selection [33]. A filter on the compatibility of the
silicon pixel detector cluster width and the vertex position is also applied
[34]. The $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collision events have an additional
requirement of the presence of at least three towers in the HF on both sides
of the interaction point with an energy above 3. The combined efficiency for
this event selection, and the remaining contamination due to non-hadronic
ultra-peripheral events which can raise the efficiency above 100%, is ($99\pm
2)\%$ [35, 36]. The minimum-bias trigger requirement removes a negligible
fraction of the events with a hard collision needed to produce mesons. We also
studied a possible contamination from photoproduction processes in the
peripheral region and found it to be negligible. Multiple-collision events
(pileup) have a negligible effect on the measurement, since the average number
of additional collisions per bunch crossing is approximately 0.9 for $\Pp\Pp$
and much smaller for $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ data.

Muons are selected in the kinematic range of $\pt^{\mu}>4$and
$\abs{\eta^{\mu}}<2.4$, and are also required to be reconstructed using the
combined information of the tracker and muon detectors (so-called ”global
muons” defined in Ref. [30]). To remove cosmic ray muons, the distance of the
muon track from the closest primary vertex must be less than 20cm in the beam
direction and 3mm in the transverse direction. Pairs of oppositely charged
muons are fitted with a common vertex constraint and kept if the fit
$\chi^{2}$ probability is larger than 1%. The studied dimuon kinematic range
is limited to $\pt^{\MM}<30\GeV$ and $\abs{y^{\MM}}<2.4$. Dimuons in this
range comprise 99% of those passing all of the analysis selection criteria.

Simulated Monte Carlo (MC) events are used to calculate correction factors for
all of the results presented, including the geometrical acceptance and
reconstruction efficiency, as well as the trigger and offline selection
efficiency. The samples are generated using 8.209 [37] for the $\Pp\Pp$
collisions and 8.209 embedded in 1.9 for the $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ events
[38]. The $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ simulation is tuned to reproduce the
observed charged-particle multiplicity and spectrum in
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ data. The CMS detector response is simulated using
[39]. Since the simulated spectrum of is not identical to the spectrum
observed in data, an event-by-event weight is applied to the simulations in
order to match the two distributions. The weight is given by a function fit to
the ratio of data over MC spectra.

##  0.4 Analysis procedure

###  0.4.1 Signal extraction

The yields of mesons are extracted using unbinned maximum-likelihood fits to
the invariant mass spectra, following the same procedure for $\Pp\Pp$ and
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ data. The signal of each state is modeled by a double
Crystal-Ball (CB) function which is the sum of two CB functions [40]. This
choice together with leaving the width parameter for the first CB free in the
fit, is made in order to account for the different mass resolution in the
barrel compared to the endcap region of the detector. A parameter relates the
widths of the two CB functions, the second one being constrained to be
narrower. The mass and the two radiative-tail parameters of both CB functions
for a given state are kept the same, as these are not affected by the detector
resolution. The mass parameter of the ground state is left free to allow for
possible shifts in the absolute momentum calibration of the reconstructed
tracks. For the excited states ( and ), the yields can vary while all other
fit parameters are fixed to be identical to those for the ground state except
for the mean and width which are fixed to values found by multiplying those
for by the ratio of the published masses of the states [41]. In the $\Pp\Pp$
data fits, the two radiative-tail parameters and the parameter for the ratio
of the two widths are allowed to vary within a Gaussian probability density
function (PDF). The mean and the width of the constraining Gaussian function
represent the average and its uncertainty, respectively, from the fits in all
the rapidity bins of the analysis with no fixed parameters. In the
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ fits, in addition, the parameter for the fraction of
the two CB functions is also constrained. In this case, the mean and the width
of the constrained parameters represent the corresponding parameter values and
their uncertainties from the $\Pp\Pp$ fits for each kinematic region. The
background PDF is an error function multiplied by an exponential, with the
yield, the error function’s two parameters, and the decay parameter of the
exponential all allowed to vary in the final fit. For bins with $\pt>6$, an
exponential without the error function provides the best fit, and was used for
the nominal result.

Figure 1: Invariant mass distribution of muon pairs in $\Pp\Pp$ (left) and
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ (right) collisions, for the kinematic range
$\pt^{\MM}<30$and $\abs{y^{\MM}}<2.4$. In both figures, the results of the
fits to the data are shown as solid blue lines. The separate yields for each
state in $\Pp\Pp$ are shown as dashed red lines in the left panel. The dashed
red lines in the right panel are derived from the fits to
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ (blue solid line). In order to show the suppression
of all three states, the amplitudes of the corresponding peaks are increased
above those found in the fit by the inverse of the measured $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$
for the corresponding meson.

Figure 1 shows the dimuon invariant mass distributions in $\Pp\Pp$ and
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions along with the fits using the model
described above, for the kinematic range $\pt^{\MM}<30$and
$\abs{y^{\MM}}<2.4$.

###  0.4.2 Corrections

In order to obtain the normalized cross sections, the yields extracted from
the fits to the dimuon invariant mass spectra are corrected for acceptance and
efficiency, and scaled by the integrated luminosity. The acceptance
corresponds to the fraction of dimuon events originating from mesons within
the kinematic range of the analysis. The acceptance values for the considered
kinematic region are 22.5% (), 27.8% (), and 31.0% () for
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions and differ by $<$1% from the corresponding
$\Pp\Pp$ data values, with the small difference being due to a small residual
difference in the kinematic spectra after weighting the MC to data.

The dimuon efficiency is defined as the probability that a muon pair within
the acceptance is reconstructed offline, satisfies the trigger condition, and
passes the analysis quality criteria described in Section 0.3. The dimuon
efficiency is calculated using MC. The individual components of the efficiency
(track reconstruction, muon identification and selection, and triggering) are
also measured using single muons from meson decays in both simulated and
collision data, with the tag-and-probe (T&P) method [30]. For the muons used
in this analysis, data and MC efficiencies are seen to differ only in the case
of the trigger efficiency, and there only by $\la$1%. For this case, scaling
factors (SF), calculated as the ratio of data over simulated efficiencies as
function of $\pt^{\mu}$ and $\eta^{\mu}$, are applied to each dimuon on an
event-by-event basis. The other components of the T&P efficiency are used only
for the estimation of systematic uncertainties. The average efficiencies
integrated over the full kinematic range are 73.5% (), 74.4% (), and 75.0% ()
in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions, and they are 8–9% higher for $\Pp\Pp$
collisions.

The integrated luminosity of 28.0with an uncertainty of 2.3% [42] is used to
normalize the yields for $\Pp\Pp$ data. For $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
collisions, the number of minimum bias collision events sampled by the trigger
($N_{\mathrm{MB}}$), together with the average nuclear overlap function
($T_{\mathrm{AA}}$), are used for the normalization. The overlap function
$T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ is given by the number of binary NN collisions divided by
the inelastic NN cross section, and can be interpreted as the NN-equivalent
integrated luminosity per heavy ion collision. Values of $T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ are
calculated with a Glauber model MC simulation [43, 44], which is also used to
obtain the average number of participating nucleons, $\langle
N_{\text{part}}\rangle$. This latter number is highly correlated with the
impact parameter of the collision, and is used as the abscissa when plotting
results as a function of $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collision centrality.

###  0.4.3 Systematic uncertainties

Point-to-point systematic uncertainties arise from the choices of signal and
background PDFs and of the central value in the fit constraints, as well as
from acceptance and efficiency corrections. Larger relative uncertainties are
obtained when the background level is higher (at lower or more forward $y$
regions), and, in particular for the , when the absolute yield is small.

The uncertainty from the choice of signal model is estimated by fitting the
data using a single CB function in combination with a Gaussian function
instead of a double CB function. The uncertainties are determined by
calculating the difference between the yield obtained with the alternative
model compared to the nominal one. For the $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ ($\Pp\Pp$)
yields, the differences are in the range of 1–7% (0.1–4.6%) for the , 2–19%
(0.1–1.3%) for the , and 5–78% (0.7–7%) for the mesons.

The systematic uncertainty from the choice of the central value in the fit
constraints is estimated by using instead of the average parameter values from
the $\Pp\Pp$ fits, the values in each $\Pp\Pp$ analysis bin when all
parameters were left floating. The differences in the $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
($\Pp\Pp$) signal yields, typically below 4% (4.5%) for the , below 8% (3%)
for the , and 45% (2%) for the , are quoted as a systematic uncertainty.

The systematic uncertainty due to the choice of background model is estimated
using two alternative background functions. One is in the form of a fourth-
order polynomial function and the other is an exponential plus an additional
linear function. The maximal deviations of the $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
($\Pp\Pp$) yield between these two models compared to the nominal are quoted
as the uncertainty and are typically in the range of 1–6% (1–5%) for the ,
2–23% (2–4%) for the , and 5–200% (3–5%) for the mesons.

For the estimation of systematic uncertainties due to acceptance and
efficiency corrections, the source of uncertainty is the imperfect knowledge
of the simulated distribution shape. To take this source into account, the
function used to weight the MC spectra event-by-event is modified within its
fit uncertainty. The acceptance and efficiency obtained from the simulated
distribution are compared with and without the variation of the function, with
the difference between the two used as an estimate of the systematic
uncertainty. In addition, there is a systematic uncertainty for the efficiency
in the T&P correction arising from the uncertainty in the SFs of the single-
muon efficiency. The systematic uncertainties of the SFs are taken into
account for trigger, tracking, and muon identification. The uncertainties in
the single muon efficiencies are propagated to the dimuon efficiency values to
estimate the systematic uncertainty from this source. The statistical
uncertainty inherent in the data set used for the T&P studies is also
considered as an additional component of the systematic uncertainty in the
corrected yields. The $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ ($\Pp\Pp$) systematic
uncertainties are in the range of 3.5–6.4% (2.6–3.9%) in the case of the total
efficiency correction and in the range of 0.1–3.0% (0.1–0.8%) for the
acceptance correction.

Finally, several sources of correlated uncertainties (, global uncertainties
common to all points) are considered: for the $\Pp\Pp$ dataset from the
$\Pp\Pp$ integrated luminosity, and for the $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ dataset
from the $T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ and the $N_{\mathrm{MB}}$ estimations. The
uncertainty on the integrated luminosity measurement for the $\Pp\Pp$ dataset
is 2.3% [42]. The uncertainty for $N_{\mathrm{MB}}$ in
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions is 2%, which accounts for the inefficiency
of trigger and event selection. For the $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ calculation,
$T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ uncertainties (Table .7 in Appendix .7) are estimated by
varying the Glauber model parameters within their uncertainties (Table .7 in
Appendix .7) [36]. The total combined uncertainty is calculated by adding the
results from the various sources in quadrature. The global uncertainty for the
differential cross section results arises from the integrated luminosity in
$\Pp\Pp$ collisions and $N_{\mathrm{MB}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
collisions. For the $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ results, the global uncertainty combines
the uncertainties from $T_{\mathrm{AA}}$, $\Pp\Pp$ luminosity, and
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ $N_{\mathrm{MB}}$ for the bins integrated over
centrality. For the centrality dependent $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ results, the
uncertainty from $T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ is included bin-by-bin, while the total
uncertainty from the $\Pp\Pp$ measurement is included in the global
uncertainty. Using the updated uncertainties of the Glauber model parameters
in Ref. [45], instead of those from Ref. [36], would reduce the
$T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ uncertainties by 0.1–1.1% and the total systematic
uncertainties for $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ by less than 0.7% (with the largest change
for the 70–100% centrality bin). However, in order to allow direct comparisons
to previous results [36, 46, 47, 27], these updated parameters are not used in
this analysis. The bin migration effect due to the momentum resolution is
negligible for the kinematic range of this measurement.

##  0.5 Results

The cross sections and values of $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ are measured in several and
y bins. The rapidity studies are performed in the range $0<\abs{y}<2.4$. This
rapidity range is evenly divided into six, three, and two bins for , , and ,
respectively. For the investigation of the behavior of the $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$
as a function of centrality, the bin limits of the centrality classes are
chosen as follows: [0, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 100%] for the and , and
[0, 30, 100%] for the . When plotted as a function of each variable (, y or
centrality), values are integrated over the full kinematic range of the other
variables. The mesons show a very strong suppression in
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions, with yields which are statistically
consistent with zero for all bins. The upper limits at 68% and 95% confidence
level (CL) for the cross section and $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ are found using the
Feldman–Cousins method [48], with the appropriate systematic uncertainties
being included in the upper limit computation.

###  0.5.1 Differential cross sections in $\Pp\Pp$ and
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions

The differential production cross section of mesons decaying in the dimuon
channel in $\Pp\Pp$ collisions is given by

$\mathcal{B}\frac{\rd\sigma^{2}}{\rd
y\rd\pt}=\frac{N/(\mathcal{A}\,\varepsilon)}{\mathcal{L}_{\text{int}}\Delta
y\Delta\pt}.$ (1)

The branching fraction for the decay $\PgU\to\MM$ is denoted by $\mathcal{B}$.
The quantity $N$ corresponds to the extracted yield of mesons in a given (,
$y$) bin, $(\mathcal{A}\,\varepsilon)$ represents the average acceptance and
efficiency in the given bin, $\mathcal{L}_{\text{int}}$ is the integrated
luminosity, and $\Delta\pt$ and $\Delta y$ are the widths of the given bin.
For $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ data, $\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{int}}$ is replaced by
$(N_{\mathrm{MB}}\,T_{\mathrm{AA}})$, as explained in Section 0.4.2, to
compare the $\Pp\Pp$ and $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ data under the hypothesis of
binary-collision scaling.

Figure 2:  Differential cross sections of the , , and mesons as a function of
for $\Pp\Pp$ (left) and $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ (right) collisions. The error
bars represent the statistical uncertainties and the boxes the systematic
uncertainties. For the meson in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions, the upper
limits at 68% (green box) and 95% (green arrow) CL are shown, and are
calculated for the same bins as for the $\Pp\Pp$ dataset. The global
integrated luminosity uncertainties of 2.3% in $\Pp\Pp$ collisions and
${}^{+3.4\%}_{-3.9\%}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions are not shown.

Figure 3:  Differential cross sections of the , , and mesons as a function of
rapidity for $\Pp\Pp$ (left) and $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ (right) collisions.
The error bars represent the statistical uncertainties and the boxes the
systematic uncertainties. For the meson in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
collisions, the upper limits at 68% (green box) and 95% (green arrow) CL are
shown. The global integrated luminosity uncertainties of 2.3% in $\Pp\Pp$
collisions and ${}^{+3.4\%}_{-3.9\%}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions
are not shown.

Figure 2 shows the differential production cross sections of mesons as a
function of in $\Pp\Pp$ and $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions. The data
points are placed at the center of each bin. The corresponding results as a
function of $\abs{y}$ are shown in Fig. 3.

###  0.5.2 Nuclear modification factor $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$

The nuclear modification factor is derived from the $\Pp\Pp$ cross sections
and $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ normalized yields as

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}(\pt,y)=\frac{N^{\textrm{AA}}(\pt,y)}{\langle
T_{\mathrm{AA}}\rangle\sigma^{\Pp\Pp}(\pt,y)},$ (2)

where $\langle T_{\mathrm{AA}}\rangle$ is the average value of
$T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ computed in each centrality bin. The quantities
$N^{\mathrm{AA}}$ and $\sigma^{\Pp\Pp}$ refer to the normalized yield of
mesons in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions corrected by acceptance and
efficiency, and the $\Pp\Pp$ cross section for a given kinematic range,
respectively.

Figure 4 shows the nuclear modification factor for the , , and mesons as
functions of and $\abs{y}$. Within the systematic uncertainties, the
$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ values show no clear dependence on or $y$. The excited
states are found to have larger suppression than the ground state, with
$R_{\mathrm{AA}}<0.2$ over the full kinematic range explored here. The
kinematic dependence of $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ is useful to constrain models of
meson suppression in a deconfined medium [9].

Figure 4:  Nuclear modification factors for , , and mesons as functions of
(left) and rapidity (right). The error bars represent the statistical
uncertainties and the boxes the systematic uncertainties. For the meson, the
upper limits at 68% (green box) and 95% (green arrow) CL are shown. The gray
box near the line at unity displays the global uncertainty, which combines the
uncertainties from $T_{\mathrm{AA}}$, $\Pp\Pp$ luminosity, and
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ $N_{\mathrm{MB}}$.

The dependence of $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ on $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collision
centrality, as quantified using the average $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$,
is depicted in Fig. 5. The strong suppression of the meson is observed in both
centrality bins studied, 0-30% and 30-100%. The $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ decreases
with increasing centrality in the case of the and mesons. A hint of this
centrality dependence of $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ for was first seen in data at
$\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$ [21] and is now confirmed using the larger data sample at
5.02.

Figure 6 shows a comparison between the measured $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ for and
mesons and two models of bottomonium suppression from Krouppa and Strickland
[9], and from Du, He, and Rapp [12]. Both models incorporate color-screening
effects on the bottomonium family and feed-down contributions from decays of
heavier quarkonia. No regeneration in QGP or cold nuclear matter effects are
considered by the first model, but are included in the second. Krouppa and
Strickland treat the dynamical evolution using anisotropic hydrodynamics,
where the relevant initial conditions are changed by varying the viscosity to
entropy ratio, $\eta/s$, and the initial momentum-space anisotropy. The
initial temperature is determined by requiring agreement with charged particle
multiplicity and elliptic flow measurements. The model of Du, He, and Rapp
uses a kinetic-rate equation to simulate the time evolution of bottomonium
abundances in ultra-relativistic heavy ion collisions. It considers medium
effects with temperature-dependent binding energies, and a lattice-QCD-based
equation of state for the fireball evolution. Within the current theoretical
and experimental uncertainties, both models are in agreement with the results.

Figure 5:  Nuclear modification factors for the , and mesons as a function of
$\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$. The boxes at the dashed line at unity
represent global uncertainties: the open box for the integrated luminosity in
$\Pp\Pp$ collisions and $N_{\mathrm{MB}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
collisions, while the full boxes show the uncertainties of $\Pp\Pp$ yields for
and states (with the larger box corresponding to the excited state). For the
meson, the upper limits at 68% (green box) and 95% (green arrow) CL are shown.

Figure 6:  Nuclear modification factors for the (left) and (right) mesons as a
function of $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ compared to calculations from
Krouppa and Strickland [9], and Du, He, and Rapp [12]. The box at the dashed
line at unity represents the global uncertainty from the integrated luminosity
in $\Pp\Pp$ collisions, $N_{\mathrm{MB}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
collisions, and the total uncertainty in the $\Pp\Pp$ yields. The data to
theory ratios are shown in the bottom panels. For Ref. [9], the points
correspond to the $4\pi\eta/s=2$ curve, while the error bars show the
difference between this one and the other two $\eta/s$ curves. For Ref. [12],
the points and error bars correspond to the center and width of the published
theory band, respectively.

Figure 7 compares centrality-integrated $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ values at
$\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$ to those at 5.02. The centrality-integrated
$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ for is measured to be $0.376\pm 0.013\stat\pm 0.035\syst$,
to be compared with the result at 2.76, $0.453\pm 0.014\stat\pm 0.046\syst$
[21]. The suppression at 5.02is larger by a factor of $\sim 1.20\pm 0.15$ (in
which only the $T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ uncertainty was considered correlated and
therefore removed), although the two $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ values are compatible
within the uncertainties. The centrality-integrated results for the and states
at 5.02are $R_{\mathrm{AA}}(\PgUb)=0.117\pm 0.022\stat\pm 0.019\syst$ and
$R_{\mathrm{AA}}(\PgUc)=0.022\pm 0.038\stat\pm 0.016\syst$ ($<$0.096 at 95%
CL). Despite having a bigger binding energy than the already measured meson
[27, 19, 18], no meson signal is found in the $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ data,
in any of the studied kinematic regions. This suggests a - and binding-energy-
dependent interplay of different phenomena affecting quarkonium states that is
yet to be fully understood [49].

Since the suppression is expected to be larger for higher temperatures in the
medium, the $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ results for the meson at the two different
collision energies can provide information on the medium temperature. The
temperatures reported in the model of Krouppa and Strickland shown in Fig. 6
are $T=641$, 631, and 629corresponding to $4\pi\eta/s=1$, 2, and 3,
respectively. For the model of Du, He, and Rapp, the temperatures are in the
range $T=550$–800. The models, which are also in agreement with the results at
2.76 [50, 12], predict increases in the medium temperature for
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions of $\sim$16% (Krouppa and Strickland) and
$\sim$7% (Du, He, and Rapp) between $\sqrtsNN=2.76$and $\sqrtsNN=5.02$.

Figure 7:  Comparison of $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ values for the , and mesons at
$\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$ and $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$ [21] for integrated centrality in
the full kinematic range. The error bars represent the statistical
uncertainties and the boxes the systematic uncertainties, including global
uncertainties.

##  0.6 Summary

Data from $\Pp\Pp$ and $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at
$\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$ collected with the CMS detector were analyzed to measure
the cross sections of , , and mesons and their nuclear modification factors as
functions of transverse momentum () and rapidity ($y$), as well as
$\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collision centrality. A gradual decrease in
$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ with $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ for the and states is
observed, while no significant dependence on or $y$ is found in the measured
region. The suppression of is larger than that seen at $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$,
although the two are compatible within uncertainties. The $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ of
the state is measured to be below 0.096 at 95% confidence level, making this
the strongest suppression observed for a quarkonium state in heavy ion
collisions to date.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the invaluable
contributions of Roy J. Glauber to the field of heavy ion nuclear physics.
Without his work, our understanding of the modifications of particle
production in heavy ion collisions, of which this paper is only one of very
many, would not have been possible.
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, 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 and RFBR (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 Ministry of Education, Youth and
Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic; 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 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] F. Karsch and E. Laermann, “Thermodynamics and in-medium hadron properties from lattice QCD”, in  Quark-Gluon Plasma III, R. C. Hwa and X.-N. Wang, eds.  World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., 2004.  arXiv:hep-lat/0305025.
  * [2] E. V. Shuryak, “Theory of hadronic plasma”, Sov. Phys. JETP 47 (1978) 212\.
  * [3] T. Matsui and H. Satz, “ suppression by quark-gluon plasma formation”,  Phys. Lett. B 178 (1986) 416, 10.1016/0370-2693(86)91404-8.
  * [4] S. Digal, P. Petreczky, and H. Satz, “Quarkonium feed down and sequential suppression”,  Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 094015, 10.1103/PhysRevD.64.094015, arXiv:hep-ph/0106017.
  * [5] N. Brambilla, J. Ghiglieri, A. Vairo, and P. Petreczky, “Static quark-antiquark pairs at finite temperature”,  Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 014017, 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.014017, arXiv:0804.0993.
  * [6] N. Brambilla et al., “Heavy quarkonium in a weakly-coupled quark-gluon plasma below the melting temperature”,  JHEP 09 (2010) 038, 10.1007/JHEP09(2010)038, arXiv:1007.4156.
  * [7] N. Brambilla et al., “Heavy quarkonium: progress, puzzles, and opportunities”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1534, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1534-9, arXiv:1010.5827.
  * [8] A. Andronic et al., “Heavy-flavour and quarkonium production in the LHC era: from proton-proton to heavy-ion collisions”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 107, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3819-5, arXiv:1506.03981.
  * [9] B. Krouppa and M. Strickland, “Predictions for bottomonia suppression in 5.023 Pb–Pb collisions”,  Universe 2 (2016) 16, 10.3390/universe2030016, arXiv:1605.03561.
  * [10] N. Brambilla, M. A. Escobedo, J. Soto, and A. Vairo, “Quarkonium suppression in heavy-ion collisions: an open quantum system approach”,  Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 034021, 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.034021, arXiv:1612.07248.
  * [11] A. Emerick, X. Zhao, and R. Rapp, “Bottomonia in the quark-gluon plasma and their production at RHIC and LHC”,  Eur. Phys. J. A 48 (2012) 72, 10.1140/epja/i2012-12072-y, arXiv:1111.6537.
  * [12] X. Du, R. Rapp, and M. He, “Color screening and regeneration of bottomonia in high-energy heavy-ion collisions”,  Phys. Rev. C 96 (2017) 054901, 10.1103/PhysRevC.96.054901, arXiv:1706.08670.
  * [13] R. L. Thews, M. Schroedter, and J. Rafelski, “Enhanced production in deconfined quark matter”,  Phys. Rev. C 63 (2001) 054905, 10.1103/PhysRevC.63.054905, arXiv:hep-ph/0007323.
  * [14] M. I. Gorenstein, A. P. Kostyuk, H. Stoecker, and W. Greiner, “Statistical coalescence model with exact charm conservation”,  Phys. Lett. B 509 (2001) 277, 10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00516-0, arXiv:hep-ph/0010148.
  * [15] A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich, and J. Stachel, “Evidence for charmonium generation at the phase boundary in ultra-relativistic nuclear collisions”,  Phys. Lett. B 652 (2007) 259, 10.1016/j.physletb.2007.07.036, arXiv:nucl-th/0701079.
  * [16] A. Mócsy and P. Petreczky, “Color screening melts quarkonium”,  Phys. Rev. Lett 99 (2007) 211602, 10.1103/PhysrevLett.99.211602, arXiv:0706.2183.
  * [17] CMS Collaboration, “Suppression and azimuthal anisotropy of prompt and nonprompt production in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 252, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4781-1, arXiv:1610.00613.
  * [18] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of prompt $\psi(2S)\to J/\psi$ yield ratios in Pb-Pb and $p$-$p$ collisions at $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 262301, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.262301, arXiv:1410.1804.
  * [19] ALICE Collaboration, “Differential studies of inclusive and production at forward rapidity in Pb–Pb collisions at $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$”,  JHEP 05 (2016) 179, 10.1007/JHEP05(2016)179, arXiv:1506.08804.
  * [20] ALICE Collaboration, “Inclusive, prompt and non-prompt J/$\psi$ production at mid-rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV”,  JHEP 07 (2015) 051, 10.1007/JHEP07(2015)051, arXiv:1504.07151.
  * [21] CMS Collaboration, “Suppression of , and production in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$”,  Phys. Lett. B 770 (2017) 357, 10.1016/j.physletb.2017.04.031, arXiv:1611.01510.
  * [22] ALICE Collaboration, “Suppression of at forward rapidity in Pb–Pb collisions at $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$”,  Phys. Lett. B 738 (2014) 361, 10.1016/j.physletb.2014.10.001, arXiv:1405.4493.
  * [23] PHENIX Collaboration, “$J/\psi$ production vs centrality, transverse momentum, and rapidity in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 232301, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.232301, arXiv:nucl-ex/0611020.
  * [24] STAR Collaboration, “Energy dependence of $J/\psi$ production in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 771 (2017) 13, 10.1016/j.physletb.2017.04.078, arXiv:1607.07517.
  * [25] STAR Collaboration, “Suppression of $\Upsilon$ production in d+Au and Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 735 (2014) 127, 10.1016/j.physletb.2014.06.028, arXiv:1312.3675. [Erratum: 10.1016/j.physletb.2015.01.046].
  * [26] CMS Collaboration, “Relative modification of prompt and yields from $\Pp\Pp$ to $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collision at $\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 188 (2017) 162301, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.162301, arXiv:1611.01438.
  * [27] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of prompt and nonprompt charmonium suppression in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at 5.02”, (2017). arXiv:1712.08959.
  * [28] CMS Collaboration, “Strong suppression of $\PgU$ excited states in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 142301, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.142301, arXiv:1706.05984.
  * [29] ALICE Collaboration, “$\Upsilon$ suppression at forward rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV”, (2018). arXiv:1805.04387.
  * [30] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at $\sqrt{s}=7\TeV$”,  JINST 7 (2012) P10002, 10.1088/1748-0221/7/10/P10002, arXiv:1206.4071.
  * [31] CMS Collaboration, “Dependence on pseudorapidity and centrality of charged hadron production in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrtsNN=2.76\TeV$”,  JHEP 08 (2011) 141, 10.1007/JHEP08(2011)141, arXiv:1107.4800.
  * [32] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,  JINST 3 (2008) S08004, 10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004.
  * [33] CMS Collaboration, “Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker”,  JINST 9 (2014) P10009, 10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10009, arXiv:1405.6569.
  * [34] CMS Collaboration, “Transverse momentum and pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=0.9$ and 2.36 TeV”,  JHEP 02 (2010) 041, 10.1007/JHEP02(2010)041, arXiv:1002.0621.
  * [35] CMS Collaboration, “Observation and studies of jet quenching in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy = 2.76 TeV”,  Phys. Rev. C 84 (2011) 024906, 10.1103/PhysRevC.84.024906, arXiv:1102.1957.
  * [36] CMS Collaboration, “Charged-particle nuclear modification factors in $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ and $\Pp\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$”,  JHEP 04 (2017) 039, 10.1007/JHEP04(2017)039, arXiv:1611.01664.
  * [37] T. Sjöstrand et al., “An introduction to 8.2”,  Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159, 10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024, arXiv:1410.3012.
  * [38] I. P. Lokhtin and A. M. Snigirev, “A model of jet quenching in ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions and high-hadron spectra at RHIC”,  Eur. Phys. J. C 45 (2006) 211, 10.1140/epjc/s2005-02426-3, arXiv:hep-ph/0506189.
  * [39] GEANT4 Collaboration, “—a simulation toolkit”,  Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506 (2003) 250, 10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8.
  * [40] M. J. Oreglia, “A study of the reactions ${\Pgy}^{\prime}\to\gamma\gamma{\Pgy}$”.  PhD thesis, Stanford University, 1980.  SLAC Report R-236 p.184.
  * [41] Particle Data Group, C. Patrignani et al., “Review of particle physics”,  Chin. Phys. C 40 (2016) 100001, 10.1088/1674-1137/40/10/100001.
  * [42] CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity calibration for the pp reference run at $\sqrt{s}=5.02\TeV$”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-16-001, 2016.
  * [43] M. L. Miller, K. Reygers, S. J. Sanders, and P. Steinberg, “Glauber modeling in high energy nuclear collisions”,  Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 57 (2007) 205, 10.1146/annurev.nucl.57.090506.123020, arXiv:nucl-ex/0701025.
  * [44] C. Loizides, J. Nagle, and P. Steinberg, “Improved version of the PHOBOS Glauber Monte Carlo”,  SoftwareX 1-2 (2015) 13, 10.1016/j.softx.2015.05.001, arXiv:1408.2549.
  * [45] C. Loizides, J. Kamin, and D. d’Enterria, “Improved Monte Carlo Glauber predictions at present and future nuclear colliders”,  Phys. Rev. C 97 (May, 2018) 054910, 10.1103/PhysRevC.97.054910.
  * [46] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the ${B}^{\pm}$ meson nuclear modification factor in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=5.02\TeV$”,  Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017), no. 15, 152301, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.152301, arXiv:1705.04727.
  * [47] CMS Collaboration, “Nuclear modification factor of D0 mesons in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=5.02$ TeV”,  Phys. Lett. B 782 (2018) 474, 10.1016/j.physletb.2018.05.074, arXiv:1708.04962.
  * [48] G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, “A unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small signals”,  Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 3873, 10.1103/PhysRevD.57.3873, arXiv:physics/9711021.
  * [49] G. Aarts et al., “Heavy-flavor production and medium properties in high-energy nuclear collisions – What next?”,  Eur. Phys. J. A 53 (2017) 93, 10.1140/epja/i2017-12282-9, arXiv:1612.08032.
  * [50] B. Krouppa, R. Ryblewski, and M. Strickland, “Bottomonia suppression in 2.76Pb–Pb collisions”,  Phys. Rev. C 92 (2015) 061901, 10.1103/PhysRevC.92.061901, arXiv:1507.03951.

##  .7 Glauber model values

Centrality variables computed using a Glauber model [44] are summarized in
Tables .7 and .7, where $d_{\text{min}}$ is the minimum distance allowed
between nucleons and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NN}}^{\text{inel}}$ is the inelastic
nucleon-nucleon (NN) cross section [36].

Glauber model parameters for $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at
$\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$.  Parameter Value Nuclear radius (fm) $6.62\pm 0.06$ Skin
depth (fm) $0.546\pm 0.010$ $d_{\text{min}}$ (fm) $0.4\pm 0.4$
$\sigma_{\mathrm{NN}}^{\text{inel}}$ (mb) $70\pm 5$

Centrality classes, average number of participating nucleons ($\langle
N_{\text{part}}\rangle$), number of binary collisions ($N_{\text{coll}}$), and
the nuclear overlap ($T_{\mathrm{AA}}$) for $\mathrm{Pb}\mathrm{Pb}$
collisions at $\sqrtsNN=5.02\TeV$, obtained using the Glauber model parameters
of Table .7.  Centrality class $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ $\langle
N_{\text{coll}}\rangle$ $\langle T_{\mathrm{AA}}\rangle$(mb-1) 0–5%
$384.3_{-2.0}^{+1.8}$ $1819_{-137}^{+130}$ $25.98_{-0.77}^{+0.47}$ 5–10%
$333.3_{-3.2}^{+3.3}$ $1432_{-106}^{+100}$ $20.46_{-0.61}^{+0.38}$ 10–20%
$264.2_{-3.8}^{+3.6}$ $1005_{-73}^{+69}$ $14.35_{-0.46}^{+0.33}$ 20–30%
$189.2_{-4.1}^{+4.0}$ $606_{-44}^{+41}$ $8.66_{-0.33}^{+0.29}$ 30–40%
$131.4_{-4.0}^{+4.0}$ $349_{-26}^{+25}$ $4.98_{-0.24}^{+0.24}$ 40–50%
$87.0_{-3.7}^{+3.7}$ $186_{-15}^{+15}$ $2.66_{-0.17}^{+0.18}$ 50–60%
$53.9_{-3.1}^{+3.2}$ $90.7_{-8.7}^{+8.9}$ $1.30_{-0.12}^{+0.12}$ 60–70%
$30.6_{-2.4}^{+2.6}$ $40.1_{-4.6}^{+5.0}$ $0.57_{-0.064}^{+0.071}$ 70–100%
$8.3_{-0.6}^{+1.0}$ $7.7_{-0.7}^{+1.2}$ $0.11_{-0.011}^{+0.018}$ 0–30%
$270.7_{-3.4}^{+3.2}$ $1079_{-78.6}^{+74.3}$ $15.41_{-0.47}^{+0.33}$ 30–100%
$46.8_{-1.2}^{+2.4}$ $98.4_{-6.4}^{+8.0}$ $1.41_{-0.061}^{+0.094}$ 0–100%
$114_{-2.6}^{+2.6}$ $393_{-28}^{+27}$ $5.61_{-0.19}^{+0.16}$

##  .8 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. 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. Maerschalk, T. Seva, E. Starling, C. Vander Velde, P.
Vanlaer, D. Vannerom, R. Yonamine, F. Zenoni Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
T. Cornelis, D. Dobur, A. Fagot, M. Gul, I. Khvastunov2, D. Poyraz, C. Roskas,
S. Salva, D. Trocino, M. Tytgat, W. Verbeke, 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, L.M.
Huertas Guativa, H. Malbouisson, 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, 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. Fang5, X. Gao5, 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, F.
Zhang5 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, J.D. Ruiz Alvarez, 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. Starodumov6, 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. Finger7, M. Finger Jr.7 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
M.A. Mahmoud8,9, Y. Mohammed8, E. Salama9,10 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. Abdulsalam11, 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, T.
Strebler, Y. Yilmaz, A. Zabi, A. Zghiche Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC
UMR 7178, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
J.-L. Agram12, J. Andrea, D. Bloch, J.-M. Brom, M. Buttignol, E.C. Chabert, C.
Collard, E. Conte12, X. Coubez, F. Drouhin12, J.-C. Fontaine12, 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, M. Lethuillier, L. Mirabito, A.L.
Pequegnot, S. Perries, A. Popov13, V. Sordini, M. Vander Donckt, S. Viret, S.
Zhang Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
T. Toriashvili14 Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
Z. Tsamalaidze7 RWTH Aachen University, I. Physikalisches Institut, Aachen,
Germany
C. Autermann, L. Feld, M.K. Kiesel, K. Klein, M. Lipinski, M. Preuten, C.
Schomakers, J. Schulz, M. Teroerde, B. Wittmer, V. Zhukov13 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. Stahl15 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. Borras16, V. Botta, A.
Campbell, P. Connor, C. Contreras-Campana, F. Costanza, C. Diez Pardos, G.
Eckerlin, D. Eckstein, T. Eichhorn, E. Eren, E. Gallo17, J. Garay Garcia, A.
Geiser, J.M. Grados Luyando, A. Grohsjean, P. Gunnellini, M. Guthoff, A. Harb,
J. Hauk, M. Hempel18, H. Jung, M. Kasemann, J. Keaveney, C. Kleinwort, I.
Korol, D. Krücker, W. Lange, A. Lelek, T. Lenz, K. Lipka, W. Lohmann18, R.
Mankel, I.-A. Melzer-Pellmann, A.B. Meyer, M. Missiroli, G. Mittag, J. Mnich,
A. Mussgiller, D. Pitzl, A. Raspereza, M. Savitskyi, P. Saxena, R. Shevchenko,
N. Stefaniuk, 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, D. Marconi, M. Meyer, M. Niedziela,
D. Nowatschin, F. Pantaleo15, T. Peiffer, A. Perieanu, C. Scharf, P. Schleper,
A. Schmidt, S. Schumann, J. Schwandt, J. Sonneveld, H. Stadie, G. Steinbrück,
F.M. Stober, M. Stöver, H. Tholen, D. Troendle, E. Usai, A. Vanhoefer, B.
Vormwald Karlsruher Institut fuer Technologie
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. Hartmann15, S.M. Heindl, U. Husemann, F.
Kassel15, 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 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. Veres19 Wigner Research
Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
G. Bencze, C. Hajdu, D. Horvath20, Á. Hunyadi, F. Sikler, V. Veszpremi, G.
Vesztergombi19 Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary
N. Beni, S. Czellar, J. Karancsi21, A. Makovec, J. Molnar, Z. Szillasi
Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
M. Bartók19, 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. Bahinipati22, P. Mal, K. Mandal, A. Nayak23, D.K. Sahoo22, N. Sahoo, S.K.
Swain Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
S. Bansal, S.B. Beri, V. Bhatnagar, R. Chawla, N. Dhingra, A. Kaur, M. Kaur,
S. Kaur, R. Kumar, P. Kumari, A. Mehta, J.B. Singh, G. Walia University of
Delhi, Delhi, India
A. Bhardwaj, S. Chauhan, 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. Bhardwaj24, R. Bhattacharya, S. Bhattacharya, U. Bhawandeep24, D. Bhowmik,
S. Dey, S. Dutt24, S. Dutta, S. Ghosh, N. Majumdar, A. Modak, K. Mondal, S.
Mukhopadhyay, S. Nandan, A. Purohit, P.K. Rout, A. Roy, S. Roy Chowdhury, S.
Sarkar, M. Sharan, B. Singh, S. Thakur24 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. Mohanty15, 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. Maity25, G. Majumder, K. Mazumdar, T. Sarkar25, N. Wickramage26
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. Chenarani27, E. Eskandari Tadavani, S.M. Etesami27, M. Khakzad, M.
Mohammadi Najafabadi, M. Naseri, S. Paktinat Mehdiabadi28, F. Rezaei
Hosseinabadi, B. Safarzadeh29, 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, F. Erricoa,b, L. Fiorea, 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,15, 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, F. Iemmi, S. Marcellinia, G. Masettia, A. Montanaria, F.L.
Navarriaa,b, 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,30, G. Sguazzonia, D. Stroma, L. Viliania INFN Laboratori
Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
L. Benussi, S. Bianco, F. Fabbri, D. Piccolo, F. Primavera15 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,15, 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,31, 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,15, F. Fabozzia,c, F. Fiengaa,b,
A.O.M. Iorioa,b, W.A. Khana, L. Listaa, S. Meolaa,d,15, P. Paoluccia,15, C.
Sciaccaa,b, F. Thyssena 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, A.
Carvalho Antunes De Oliveiraa,b, M. Dall’Ossoa,b, P. De Castro Manzanoa, T.
Dorigoa, U. Dossellia, F. Gasparinia,b, U. Gasparinia,b, A. Gozzelinoa, S.
Lacapraraa, P. Lujan, M. Margonia,b, A.T. Meneguzzoa,b, N. Pozzobona,b, P.
Ronchesea,b, R. Rossina,b, F. Simonettoa,b, A. Tiko, E. Torassaa, S. Venturaa,
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,15, 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,30, F. Ligabuea,c, T. Lomtadzea, 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, F. Margarolia,b, B.
Marzocchia,b, P. Meridiania, G. Organtinia,b, 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, P. Traczyka,b 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, J. Park, 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 Ali32, F. Mohamad Idris33, W.A.T. Wan
Abdullah, M.N. Yusli, Z. Zolkapli Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios
Avanzados del IPN, Mexico City, Mexico
M.C. Duran-Osuna, H. Castilla-Valdez, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, G. Ramirez-
Sanchez, I. Heredia-De La Cruz34, R.I. Rabadan-Trejo, R. Lopez-Fernandez, J.
Mejia Guisao, 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. Zalewski Institute of Experimental Physics, Faculty
of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
K. Bunkowski, A. Byszuk35, 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
A. Baginyan, A. Golunov, I. Golutvin, V. Karjavin, I. Kashunin, V. Korenkov,
G. Kozlov, A. Lanev, A. Malakhov, V. Matveev36,37, P. Moisenz, V. Palichik, V.
Perelygin, S. Shmatov, N. Skatchkov, V. Smirnov, V. Trofimov, B.S.
Yuldashev38, 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. Bylinkin37 National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow
Engineering Physics Institute’ (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia
M. Chadeeva41, O. Markin, P. Parygin, D. Philippov, S. Polikarpov, V. Rusinov
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
V. Andreev, M. Azarkin37, I. Dremin37, M. Kirakosyan37, S.V. Rusakov, A.
Terkulov Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State
University, Moscow, Russia
A. Baskakov, A. Belyaev, E. Boos, A. Ershov, A. Gribushin, A. Kaminskiy42, O.
Kodolova, V. Korotkikh, I. Lokhtin, I. Miagkov, S. Obraztsov, S. Petrushanko,
V. Savrin, A. Snigirev, I. Vardanyan 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, 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. Fallavollita, 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. Karacheban18, J.
Kieseler, V. Knünz, A. Kornmayer, M.J. Kortelainen, 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. Milenovic45, F. Moortgat, M.
Mulders, H. Neugebauer, J. Ngadiuba, S. Orfanelli, L. Orsini, L. Pape, E.
Perez, M. Peruzzi, A. Petrilli, G. Petrucciani, A. Pfeiffer, M. Pierini, F.M.
Pitters, D. Rabady, A. Racz, T. Reis, G. Rolandi46, M. Rovere, H. Sakulin, C.
Schäfer, C. Schwick, M. Seidel, M. Selvaggi, A. Sharma, P. Silva, P.
Sphicas47, A. Stakia, J. Steggemann, M. Stoye, M. Tosi, D. Treille, A. Tsirou,
V. Veckalns48, M. Verweij, W.D. Zeuner Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen,
Switzerland
W. Bertl${}^{\textrm{\textdagger}}$, L. Caminada49, 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, G. Dissertori, M. Dittmar, M.
Donegà, C. Dorfer, C. Grab, C. Heidegger, D. Hits, J. Hoss, T. Klijnsma, W.
Lustermann, B. Mangano, M. Marionneau, M.T. Meinhard, D. Meister, F. Micheli,
P. Musella, F. Nessi-Tedaldi, F. Pandolfi, J. Pata, F. Pauss, G. Perrin, L.
Perrozzi, M. Quittnat, M. Reichmann, 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. Amsler50, M.F. Canelli, A. De Cosa, R. Del Burgo, S.
Donato, C. Galloni, T. Hreus, B. Kilminster, 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. Bakirci51, A. Bat, F. Boran, S. Cerci52, S. Damarseckin, Z.S. Demiroglu,
C. Dozen, I. Dumanoglu, S. Girgis, G. Gokbulut, Y. Guler, I. Hos53, E.E.
Kangal54, O. Kara, A. Kayis Topaksu, U. Kiminsu, M. Oglakci, G. Onengut, K.
Ozdemir55, B. Tali52, U.G. Tok, S. Turkcapar, I.S. Zorbakir, C. Zorbilmez
Middle East Technical University, Physics Department, Ankara, Turkey
G. Karapinar56, K. Ocalan57, M. Yalvac, M. Zeyrek Bogazici University,
Istanbul, Turkey
E. Gülmez, M. Kaya58, O. Kaya59, S. Tekten, E.A. Yetkin60 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. Newbold61,
S. Paramesvaran, T. Sakuma, S. Seif El Nasr-storey, D. Smith, V.J. Smith
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
A. Belyaev62, C. Brew, R.M. Brown, L. Calligaris, 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, 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. Nash63, A. Nikitenko6, V. Palladino, M. Pesaresi, D.M. Raymond, A.
Richards, A. Rose, E. Scott, C. Seez, A. Shtipliyski, S. Summers, A. Tapper,
K. Uchida, M. Vazquez Acosta64, T. Virdee15, 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. Hogan65, 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, S. Tuli, Z. Wang
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. Wasserbaech66, 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, I. Dutta, 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, S. Dittmer, 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, 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-Navarro67, 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, 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, O.
Evdokimov, C.E. Gerber, D.A. Hangal, D.J. Hofman, K. Jung, J. Kamin, I.D.
Sandoval Gonzalez, M.B. Tonjes, H. Trauger, N. Varelas, H. Wang, Z. Wu, J.
Zhang The University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
B. Bilki68, W. Clarida, K. Dilsiz69, S. Durgut, R.P. Gandrajula, M.
Haytmyradov, V. Khristenko, J.-P. Merlo, H. Mermerkaya70, A. Mestvirishvili,
A. Moeller, J. Nachtman, H. Ogul71, Y. Onel, F. Ozok72, 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, 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. 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, J.
Salfeld-Nebgen, G.S.F. Stephans, K. Sumorok, K. Tatar, D. Velicanu, J. Wang,
T.W. Wang, B. Wyslouch 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
J. Dolen, A. Godshalk, C. Harrington, I. Iashvili, 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.
Musienko36, 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, B. Liu, 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, 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, S. Folgueras, 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, 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. Bouhali73, A. Castaneda Hernandez73, A. Celik, M. Dalchenko, M. De Mattia,
A. Delgado, S. Dildick, R. Eusebi, J. Gilmore, T. Huang, T. Kamon74, 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, 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 Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
6: Also at Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
7: Also at Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
8: Also at Fayoum University, El-Fayoum, Egypt
9: Now at British University in Egypt, Cairo, Egypt
10: Now at Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt
11: Also at Department of Physics, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi
Arabia
12: Also at Université de Haute Alsace, Mulhouse, France
13: Also at Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State
University, Moscow, Russia
14: Also at Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
15: Also at CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva,
Switzerland
16: Also at RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen,
Germany
17: Also at University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
18: Also at Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus, Germany
19: Also at MTA-ELTE Lendület CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, Eötvös
Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
20: Also at Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary
21: Also at Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
22: Also at Indian Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India
23: Also at Institute of Physics, Bhubaneswar, India
24: Also at Shoolini University, Solan, India
25: Also at University of Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan, India
26: Also at University of Ruhuna, Matara, Sri Lanka
27: Also at Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran
28: Also at Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
29: Also at Plasma Physics Research Center, Science and Research Branch,
Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
30: Also at Università degli Studi di Siena, Siena, Italy
31: Also at INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a, Università di Milano-Bicocca b,
Milano, Italy
32: Also at International Islamic University of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia
33: Also at Malaysian Nuclear Agency, MOSTI, Kajang, Malaysia
34: Also at Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, Mexico city, Mexico
35: Also at Warsaw University of Technology, Institute of Electronic Systems,
Warsaw, Poland
36: Also at Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia
37: Now at National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics
Institute’ (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia
38: Also at Institute of Nuclear Physics of the Uzbekistan Academy of
Sciences, Tashkent, Uzbekistan
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 INFN Sezione di Padova a, Università di Padova b, Università di
Trento (Trento) c, Padova, Italy
43: Also at Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk, Russia
44: Also at Faculty of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
45: Also at University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of
Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia
46: Also at Scuola Normale e Sezione dell’INFN, Pisa, Italy
47: Also at National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
48: Also at Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia
49: Also at Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
50: Also at Stefan Meyer Institute for Subatomic Physics (SMI), Vienna,
Austria
51: Also at Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey
52: Also at Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, 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 Izmir Institute of Technology, Izmir, Turkey
57: Also at Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey
58: Also at Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey
59: Also at Kafkas University, Kars, Turkey
60: Also at Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey
61: Also at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
62: Also at School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southampton,
Southampton, United Kingdom
63: Also at Monash University, Faculty of Science, Clayton, Australia
64: Also at Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, La Laguna, Spain
65: Also at Bethel University, St. Paul, USA
66: Also at Utah Valley University, Orem, USA
67: Also at Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
68: Also at Beykent University, Istanbul, Turkey
69: Also at Bingol University, Bingol, Turkey
70: Also at Erzincan University, Erzincan, Turkey
71: Also at Sinop University, Sinop, Turkey
72: Also at Mimar Sinan University, Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey
73: Also at Texas A&M University at Qatar, Doha, Qatar
74: Also at Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea