CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-PAS-TOP-14-013
Measurement of double differential cross sections for top quark pair production in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 8 TeV
Abstract: Normalized double differential cross sections for top quark pair ($\rm{t\bar{t}}$) production are measured in pp collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC. The analyzed data correspond to an integrated luminosity of 19.7 fb$^{-1}$. The measurement is performed using the dilepton ${\rm e}^{\pm}\mu^{\mp}$ decay mode of the $\rm{t\bar{t}}$ system. The $\rm{t\bar{t}}$ cross section is measured as a function of various combinations of two observables characterizing the kinematics of the top quark and the $\rm{t\bar{t}}$ system. The data are compared to calculations in perturbative QCD at next-to-leading order and approximate next-to-next-to-leading order, and to predictions of Monte Carlo event generators that complement fixed-order computations with parton showers, hadronization, and multiple-parton interactions. Overall, a reasonable agreement is observed which is improved when the latest global sets of proton parton distribution functions are used in the predictions. The impact of the measured cross sections constraining the gluon distribution in the proton is demonstrated in a fit of parametrized parton distribution functions to the data.
Figures & Tables Summary References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
Distributions of $p_{T}(\rm t)$ (a), $|y(\rm t)|$ (b), $p_{T}({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (c), $|y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )|$ (d) and $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (e) in events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to the data statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The lower panel in each plot shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-a:
Distributions of $p_{T}(\rm t)$ (a), $|y(\rm t)|$ (b), $p_{T}({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (c), $|y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )|$ (d) and $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (e) in events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to the data statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The lower panel in each plot shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-b:
Distributions of $p_{T}(\rm t)$ (a), $|y(\rm t)|$ (b), $p_{T}({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (c), $|y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )|$ (d) and $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (e) in events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to the data statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The lower panel in each plot shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-c:
Distributions of $p_{T}(\rm t)$ (a), $|y(\rm t)|$ (b), $p_{T}({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (c), $|y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )|$ (d) and $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (e) in events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to the data statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The lower panel in each plot shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-d:
Distributions of $p_{T}(\rm t)$ (a), $|y(\rm t)|$ (b), $p_{T}({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (c), $|y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )|$ (d) and $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (e) in events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to the data statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The lower panel in each plot shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-e:
Distributions of $p_{T}(\rm t)$ (a), $|y(\rm t)|$ (b), $p_{T}({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (c), $|y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )|$ (d) and $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (e) in events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to the data statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The lower panel in each plot shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 2:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\rm t})}$ in different ${y({\rm t})}$ ranges to MC predictions calculated using MadGraph+Pythia6 , Powheg+Pythia6 , Powheg+Herwig6 and mc@nlo+Herwig6. The inner vertical bars on the data points represent the statistical uncertainties and the full bars include also the systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. In the bottom panel the ratios to the MadGraph+Pythia6 (MG+P) predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 3:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${y({\rm t})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to MC predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 2.

png pdf
Figure 4:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )}$ in different of $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to MC predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 2.

png pdf
Figure 5:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${\Delta \eta (\mathrm{t},\mathrm{\bar{t}})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to MC predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 2.

png pdf
Figure 6:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to MC predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 2.

png pdf
Figure 7:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${\Delta \phi (\mathrm{t}, \mathrm{\bar{t}})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to MC predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 2.

png pdf
Figure 8:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\rm t})}$ in different ${y({\rm t})}$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ and approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions calculated with CT14 and HERAPDF2.0. The inner vertical bars on the data points represent the statistical uncertainties and the full bars include also the systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. The light band on the CT14 theoretical predictions represents the scale uncertainties of the NLO predictions and the dark band shows the scale and PDF uncertainties added in quadrature. The dotted line shows NLO predictions calculated with HERAPDF2.0 . The dashed line shows approximate NNLO predictions calculated with CT14 . In the bottom panel the ratios to the CT14 predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 9:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ differential cross sections as a function of ${y({\rm t})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 10:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 11:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${\Delta \eta (\mathrm{t}, \mathrm{\bar{t}})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 12:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 13:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${\Delta \phi (\mathrm{t}, \mathrm{\bar{t}})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 13-a:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${\Delta \phi (\mathrm{t}, \mathrm{\bar{t}})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 13-b:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${\Delta \phi (\mathrm{t}, \mathrm{\bar{t}})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 13-c:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${\Delta \phi (\mathrm{t}, \mathrm{\bar{t}})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 13-d:
Comparison of the measured normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ differential cross sections as a function of ${\Delta \phi (\mathrm{t}, \mathrm{\bar{t}})}$ in different $M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ ranges to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ predictions. Details can be found in the caption of Fig. 8. Approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ predictions are not available for this distribution.

png pdf
Figure 14-a:
The gluon (a), sea quark (b), u valence (c) and d valence quark (d) distributions at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the DIS and ${\rm W}^{\pm }$ boson charge asymmetry data only. The total uncertainty of each distribution is shown by a shaded (or hatched) band. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.

png pdf
Figure 14-b:
The gluon (a), sea quark (b), u valence (c) and d valence quark (d) distributions at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the DIS and ${\rm W}^{\pm }$ boson charge asymmetry data only. The total uncertainty of each distribution is shown by a shaded (or hatched) band. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.

png pdf
Figure 14-c:
The gluon (a), sea quark (b), u valence (c) and d valence quark (d) distributions at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the DIS and ${\rm W}^{\pm }$ boson charge asymmetry data only. The total uncertainty of each distribution is shown by a shaded (or hatched) band. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.

png pdf
Figure 14-d:
The gluon (a), sea quark (b), u valence (c) and d valence quark (d) distributions at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the DIS and ${\rm W}^{\pm }$ boson charge asymmetry data only. The total uncertainty of each distribution is shown by a shaded (or hatched) band. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.

png pdf
Figure 15-a:
Fractional total uncertainties of the gluon (a), sea quark (b), u valence (c) and d valence quark (d) distributions at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, shown by shaded (or hatched) bands, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.

png pdf
Figure 15-b:
Fractional total uncertainties of the gluon (a), sea quark (b), u valence (c) and d valence quark (d) distributions at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, shown by shaded (or hatched) bands, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.

png pdf
Figure 15-c:
Fractional total uncertainties of the gluon (a), sea quark (b), u valence (c) and d valence quark (d) distributions at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, shown by shaded (or hatched) bands, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.

png pdf
Figure 15-d:
Fractional total uncertainties of the gluon (a), sea quark (b), u valence (c) and d valence quark (d) distributions at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, shown by shaded (or hatched) bands, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.

png pdf
Figure 16-a:
Same as in Fig. 15 for the variants of the PDF fit using the single differential ${\mathrm {t}\overline {\mathrm {t}}}$ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 16-b:
Same as in Fig. 15 for the variants of the PDF fit using the single differential ${\mathrm {t}\overline {\mathrm {t}}}$ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 16-c:
Same as in Fig. 15 for the variants of the PDF fit using the single differential ${\mathrm {t}\overline {\mathrm {t}}}$ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 16-d:
Same as in Fig. 15 for the variants of the PDF fit using the single differential ${\mathrm {t}\overline {\mathrm {t}}}$ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 17:
Fractional total uncertainties of the gluon distribution at $\mu _f^2=$ 30 000 GeV$^2$, shown by shaded (or hatched) bands, as obtained in the PDF fit using the DIS and ${\rm W}^{\pm }$ boson charge asymmetry data only, as well as single and double differential ${\mathrm {t}\overline {\mathrm {t}}}$ cross sections. 18p stands for the 18-parameter fit as described in the text.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
The ${\chi ^2}$ values of double differential normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ cross sections with respect to MC calculations.

png pdf
Table 2:
The ${\chi ^2}$ values of double differential normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ cross sections with respect to NLO $O(\alpha _s^3)$ theoretical calculations [17] using different PDF sets. The ${\chi ^2}$ values that include PDF uncertainties are shown in parenthesis.

png pdf
Table 3:
The ${\chi ^2}$ values of double differential normalized ${\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } }$ cross sections with respect to approximate NNLO $O(\alpha _s^4)$ theoretical calculations [4,18,65,66] using different PDF sets.

png pdf
Table 4:
The global and partial ${\chi ^2}$/dof values for the data sets in all variants of the PDF fit. The variant of the fit which uses the DIS and ${\rm W}^{\pm }$ boson charge asymmetry data only is denoted as `Nominal', Every double differential ${\mathrm {t}\overline {\mathrm {t}}}$ distribution is added ($+$) to the nominal data, one at a time. For HERA measurements, the energy of the proton beam, $E_{ {\mathrm {p}}}$, is listed for each data set, with electron energy being $E_{ {\mathrm {e}}}=$ 27.5 GeV. The `Correlated ${\chi ^2} $' and `Log penalty $\chi ^2$' entries refer to the ${\chi ^2}$ contributions from the nuisance parameters and from the logarithmic term, respectively, described in the text.
Summary
The first measurement of normalized double differential $\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }$ production cross sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV is presented. The measurement is performed for the ${\rm e}\mu$ final state, using 19.7 fb$^{-1}$ of collision data collected by the CMS detector. The normalized $\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }$ cross section is measured in the full phase space as a function of six different combinations of variables, which describe the top quark or $\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }$ kinematics. The observed trends support the findings reported in the previous single differential $\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }$ measurement, in particular the tendency of a softer distribution of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{t})$ in data compared to the MC predictions. The presented double differential studies reveal a broader distribution of $y(\mathrm{t})$ at high $M(\mathrm{ t \bar{t} })$ in data than in MC and a larger pseudorapidity separation $\Delta \eta (\mathrm{t}, \mathrm{\bar{t}})$ at moderate $M(\mathrm{ t \bar{t} })$ in data compared to MC. The data are in agreement with NLO QCD predictions based on modern PDF sets. The measured double differential cross sections have been incorporated into a PDF fit together with other data from HERA and LHC. A significant impact on the gluon distributions at large values of $x$ is observed, in particular when the distribution of $y({\mathrm{t \bar{t}}})$ in the $M(\mathrm{ t \bar{t} })$ ranges is used. It exceeds the impact of single differential normalized $\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }$ cross sections, thus strongly suggests the use of these measurements in future PDF fits.
References
1 D0 Collaboration Observation of the top quark PRL 74 (1995) 2632--2637 hep-ex/9503003
2 CDF Collaboration Observation of top quark production in $ \bar{p}p $ collisions PRL 74 (1995) 2626--2631 hep-ex/9503002
3 M. Czakon, M. L. Mangano, A. Mitov, and J. Rojo Constraints on the gluon PDF from top quark pair production at hadron colliders JHEP 07 (2013) 167 1303.7215
4 M. Guzzi, K. Lipka, and S.-O. Moch Top-quark pair production at hadron colliders: differential cross section and phenomenological applications with DiffTop JHEP 01 (2015) 082 1406.0386
5 CMS Collaboration Constraints on parton distribution functions and extraction of the strong coupling constant from the inclusive jet cross section in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = 7 $ $ \,\text {TeV} $ EPJC 75 (2015), no. 6, 288 CMS-SMP-12-028
1410.6765
6 CMS Collaboration Measurements of differential jet cross sections in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}=7 $ TeV with the CMS detector PRD 87 (2013), no. 11, 112002, , [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D \bf 87 (2013), no. 11, 119902] CMS-QCD-11-004
1212.6660
7 CDF Collaboration First Measurement of the $ t{\bar t} $ Differential Cross Section $ d\sigma/dM_{t{\bar t}} $ in $ p{\bar p} $ Collisions at $ \sqrt{s} $ = 1.96 TeV PRL 102 (2009) 222003 0903.2850
8 D0 Collaboration Measurement of differential $ t\bar{t} $ production cross sections in $ p\bar{p} $ collisions PRD 90 (2014), no. 9, 092006 1401.5785
9 ATLAS Collaboration Measurements of top quark pair relative differential cross-sections with ATLAS in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} $ = 7 TeV EPJC 73 (2013) 2261 1207.5644
10 CMS Collaboration Measurement of differential top-quark pair production cross sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV EPJC 73 (2013) 2339 CMS-TOP-11-013
1211.2220
11 ATLAS Collaboration Measurements of normalized differential cross-sections for $ t{\bar t} $ production in $ pp $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} $ = 7 TeV using the ATLAS detector PRD 90 (2014) 072004 1407.0371
12 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of top quark pair differential cross-sections in the dilepton channel in $ pp $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} $ = 7 and 8 TeV with ATLAS Submitted to PRD 1607.07281
13 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the differential cross section for top quark pair production in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = 8\,\text {TeV} $ EPJC 75 (2015), no. 11, 542 CMS-TOP-12-028
1505.04480
14 ATLAS Collaboration Measurements of top-quark pair differential cross-sections in the lepton+jets channel in $ pp $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}=8 $ TeV using the ATLAS detector 1511.04716
15 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the differential cross section for $ \mathrm{t \bar t} $ production in the dilepton final state at $ \sqrt{s}=13 \mathrm{TeV} $
16 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the inclusive and differential tt production cross sections in lepton + jets final states at 13 TeV
17 M. L. Mangano, P. Nason, and G. Ridolfi Heavy quark correlations in hadron collisions at next-to-leading order Nucl. Phys. B 373 (1992) 295--345
18 N. Kidonakis, E. Laenen, S. Moch, and R. Vogt Sudakov resummation and finite order expansions of heavy quark hadroproduction cross-sections PRD 64 (2001) 114001 hep-ph/0105041
19 J. Alwall et al. MadGraph 5 : Going Beyond JHEP 06 (2011) 128 1106.0522
20 P. Artoisenet et al. Automatic spin-entangled decays of heavy resonances in Monte Carlo simulations JHEP 03 (2013) 015 1212.3460
21 T. Sj\"ostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands PYTHIA 6.4 Physics and Manual JHEP 05 (2006) 026 hep-ph/0603175
22 J. Pumplin et al. New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from global QCD analysis JHEP 07 (2002) 012 hep-ph/0201195
23 S. Alioli et al. NLO single-top production matched with shower in POWHEG: $ s $- and $ t $-channel contributions JHEP 09 (2009) 111 0907.4076
24 S. Alioli et al. A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX JHEP 06 (2010) 043 1002.2581
25 E. Re Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method EPJC 71 (2011) 1547 1009.2450
26 G. Corcella et al. HERWIG 6.5: An event generator for hadron emission reactions with interfering gluons (including supersymmetric processes) JHEP 01 (2001) 010 hep-ph/0011363
27 S. Frixione and B. R. Webber Matching NLO QCD computations and parton shower simulations JHEP 06 (2002) 29 hep-ph/0204244
28 H.-L. Lai et al. New parton distributions for collider physics PRD 82 (2010) 074024 1007.2241
29 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT4: A Simulation toolkit NIMA 506 (2003) 250--303
30 CMS Collaboration Particle-Flow Event Reconstruction in CMS and Performance for Jets, Taus, and $ E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}} $ CDS
31 CMS Collaboration Commissioning of the particle-flow event reconstruction with the first LHC collisions recorded in the CMS detector CDS
32 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The catchment area of jets JHEP 04 (2008) 005 0802.1188
33 CMS Collaboration Performance of Electron Reconstruction and Selection with the CMS Detector in Proton-Proton Collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = 8 $ TeV JINST 10 (2015), no. 06, P06005 CMS-EGM-13-001
1502.02701
34 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the Drell-Yan Cross Section in $ pp $ Collisions at $ \sqrt{s}=7 $ TeV JHEP 10 (2011) 007 CMS-EWK-10-007
1108.0566
35 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The anti-$ k_t $ jet clustering algorithm JHEP 04 (2008) 063 0802.1189
36 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez FastJet User Manual EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 1111.6097
37 CMS Collaboration Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment JINST 8 (2013) P04013 CMS-BTV-12-001
1211.4462
38 CMS Collaboration Missing transverse energy performance of the CMS detector JINST 6 (2011) P09001 CMS-JME-10-009
1106.5048
39 CMS Collaboration Performance of missing transverse energy reconstruction by the CMS experiment in $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV pp data JINST 10 (2015) P02006 CMS-JME-13-003
1411.0511
40 D0 Collaboration Measurement of the top quark mass using dilepton events. D$ \O\ $ Collaboration PRL 80 (1998) 2063--2068 hep-ex/9706014
41 I. Korol Measurement of Double Differential $\mathrm{t \bar{t}}$ Production Cross Sections with the CMS Detector PhD thesis, Universit\"at Hamburg (2016) DESY-THESIS-2016-011
42 S. Schmitt TUnfold: an algorithm for correcting migration effects in high energy physics JINST 7 (2012) T10003 1205.6201
43 A. N. Tikhonov Solution of incorrectly formulated problems and the regularization method Soviet Math. Dokl. 4 (1963) 1035--1038
44 V. Blobel Data Unfolding Terascale statistics school Hamburg (2010)
45 Particle Data Group Collaboration Review of Particle Physics CPC 38 (2014) 090001
46 TOTEM Collaboration First measurement of the total proton-proton cross section at the LHC energy of $ \sqrt{s} $ = 7 TeV Europhys. Lett. 96 (2011) 21002 1110.1395
47 CMS Collaboration Performance of b tagging at $ \sqrt{s}=8 $ TeV in multijet, ttbar and boosted topology events Technical Report CMS-PAS-BTV-13-001, CERN, Geneva (2013)
48 CMS Collaboration Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV Submitted to JINST CMS-JME-13-004
1607.03663
49 CMS Collaboration Determination of jet energy calibration and transverse momentum resolution in CMS JINST 6 (2011) P11002 CMS-JME-10-011
1107.4277
50 CMS Collaboration CMS Luminosity Based on Pixel Cluster Counting - Summer 2013 Update CMS-PAS-LUM-13-001 CMS-PAS-LUM-13-001
51 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the top quark mass using proton-proton data at $ {\sqrt{s}} $ = 7 and 8 TeV PRD 93 (2016), no. 7, 072004 CMS-TOP-14-022
1509.04044
52 N. Kidonakis NNNLO soft-gluon corrections for the top-quark $ p_T $ and rapidity distributions PRD 91 (2015), no. 3, 031501 1411.2633
53 M. Czakon, D. Heymes, and A. Mitov High-precision differential predictions for top-quark pairs at the LHC PRL 116 (2016), no. 8, 082003 1511.00549
54 M. Czakon, D. Heymes, and A. Mitov Dynamical scales for multi-TeV top-pair production at the LHC 1606.03350
55 J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis MCFM for the Tevatron and the LHC NPPS 205-206 (2010) 10--15 1007.3492
56 S. Alekhin, J. Blumlein, and S. Moch Parton Distribution Functions and Benchmark Cross Sections at NNLO PRD 86 (2012) 054009 1202.2281
57 A. Accardi et al. Constraints on large-$ x $ parton distributions from new weak boson production and deep-inelastic scattering data PRD 93 (2016), no. 11, 114017 1602.03154
58 S. Dulat et al. New parton distribution functions from a global analysis of quantum chromodynamics PRD 93 (2016), no. 3, 033006 1506.07443
59 ZEUS, H1 Collaboration Combination of measurements of inclusive deep inelastic $ {e^{\pm }p} $ scattering cross sections and QCD analysis of HERA data EPJC 75 (2015), no. 12, 580 1506.06042
60 P. Jimenez-Delgado and E. Reya Delineating parton distributions and the strong coupling PRD 89 (2014), no. 7, 074049 1403.1852
61 L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, P. Motylinski, and R. S. Thorne Parton distributions in the LHC era: MMHT 2014 PDFs EPJC 75 (2015), no. 5, 204 1412.3989
62 NNPDF Collaboration Parton distributions for the LHC Run II JHEP 04 (2015) 040 1410.8849
63 A. Buckley et al. LHAPDF6: parton density access in the LHC precision era EPJC 75 (2015) 132 1412.7420
64 M. Cacciari et al. Updated predictions for the total production cross sections of top and of heavier quark pairs at the Tevatron and at the LHC JHEP 09 (2008) 127 0804.2800
65 M. Guzzi, K. Lipka, and S.-O. Moch Differential cross sections for top pair production at the LHC Nuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings (2015) NPPP601, , [PoSDIS2014,052(2014)] 1409.0444
66 M. Guzzi, K. Lipka, and S.-O. Moch Top-quark production at the LHC: differential cross section and phenomenological applications PoS DIS2013 (2013) 049 1308.1635
67 S. Alekhin, J. Blumlein, and S. Moch The ABM parton distributions tuned to LHC data PRD 89 (2014), no. 5, 054028 1310.3059
68 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the differential cross section and charge asymmetry for inclusive pp to W + X production at $ \sqrt{s}=8 $ TeV Submitted to EPJC CMS-SMP-14-022
1603.01803
69 S. Alekhin et al. HERAFitter EPJC 75 (2015), no. 7, 304 1410.4412
70 xFitter group xFitter xFitter web site
71 V. Gribov and L. Lipatov Deep inelastic $ ep $ scattering in perturbation theory Sov.J.Nucl.Phys. 15 (1972)438--450
72 G. Altarelli and G. Parisi Asymptotic Freedom in Parton Language Nucl. Phys. B 126 (1977) 298
73 G. Curci, W. Furmanski, and R. Petronzio Evolution of Parton Densities Beyond Leading Order: The Nonsinglet Case Nucl. Phys. B 175 (1980) 27
74 W. Furmanski and R. Petronzio Singlet Parton Densities Beyond Leading Order PLB 97 (1980) 437
75 S. Moch, J. Vermaseren, and A. Vogt The Three-Loop Splitting Functions in QCD: The Nonsinglet Case Nucl. Phys. B 688 (2004) 101--134 hep-ph/0403192
76 A. Vogt, S. Moch, and J. Vermaseren The Three-Loop Splitting Functions in QCD: The Singlet Case Nucl. Phys. B 691 (2004) 129--181 hep-ph/0404111
77 M. Botje QCDNUM: Fast QCD Evolution and Convolution CPC 182 (2011) 490--532 1005.1481
78 R. S. Thorne and R. G. Roberts An Ordered analysis of heavy flavor production in deep inelastic scattering PRD 57 (1998) 6871--6898 hep-ph/9709442
79 R. S. Thorne A Variable-flavor number scheme for NNLO PRD 73 (2006) 054019 hep-ph/0601245
80 R. S. Thorne Effect of changes of variable flavor number scheme on parton distribution functions and predicted cross sections PRD 86 (2012) 074017 1201.6180
81 J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis An Update on vector boson pair production at hadron colliders PRD 60 (1999) 113006 hep-ph/9905386
82 T. Carli et al. A posteriori inclusion of parton density functions in NLO QCD final-state calculations at hadron colliders: The APPLGRID Project EPJC 66 (2010) 503--524 0911.2985
83 A. D. Martin, W. J. Stirling, R. S. Thorne, and G. Watt Parton distributions for the LHC EPJC 63 (2009) 189--285 0901.0002
84 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the muon charge asymmetry in inclusive $ pp \to W+X $ production at $ \sqrt s = $ 7 TeV and an improved determination of light parton distribution functions PRD 90 (2014), no. 3, 032004 CMS-SMP-12-021
1312.6283
85 H1 Collaboration Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering at High $ Q^2 $ with Longitudinally Polarised Lepton Beams at HERA JHEP 09 (2012) 061 1206.7007
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN