CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-PAS-SMP-13-008
Search for anomalous couplings in the production of WW and WZ pairs decaying semileptonically in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV
Abstract: A search for new physics is reported, in which the new physics appears in anomalous couplings of triple gauge boson vertices involving WW or WZ diboson production from proton-proton collisions. The search is performed on a sample of events containing a W boson that decays leptonically and a W or Z boson where the decay products are merged into a single jet. The data sample, collected at $\sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV with the CMS detector at the LHC, corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 19 fb$^{-1}$. No evidence for anomalous triple gauge couplings is found and the following 95% confidence limits are set on their magnitudes: $\lambda$($ [-0.011, 0.011]$), $\Delta{\kappa_\gamma}$($ [-0.044, 0.063]$), and $\Delta{G_1^Z}$($ [-0.0087, 0.024]$). These limits are also translated into their effective field theory equivalents: $c_{WWW}/\Lambda^2$($ [-2.7, 2.7] \mathrm{TeV}^{-2}$), $c_B/\Lambda^2$($ [-14, 17] \mathrm{TeV}^{-2}$), and $c_W/\Lambda^2$($ [-2.0, 5.7] \mathrm{TeV}^{-2}$).
Figures & Tables Summary References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
Distributions of the merged jet invariant mass for muons, (top) and electrons (bottom) with the projections of the relevant components overlaid. The merged jet invariant mass is plotted for all events (left), after subtraction of all components except the diboson (center) and subsequent normalized residual or pull distributions: $(\text {data} - \text {fit})/(\text {fituncertainty})$ (right). The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The dashed vertical lines mark the signal region of $70

png
Figure 1-a:
Distributions of the merged jet invariant mass for muons, (top) and electrons (bottom) with the projections of the relevant components overlaid. The merged jet invariant mass is plotted for all events (left), after subtraction of all components except the diboson (center) and subsequent normalized residual or pull distributions: $(\text {data} - \text {fit})/(\text {fituncertainty})$ (right). The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The dashed vertical lines mark the signal region of $70

png
Figure 1-b:
Distributions of the merged jet invariant mass for muons, (top) and electrons (bottom) with the projections of the relevant components overlaid. The merged jet invariant mass is plotted for all events (left), after subtraction of all components except the diboson (center) and subsequent normalized residual or pull distributions: $(\text {data} - \text {fit})/(\text {fituncertainty})$ (right). The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The dashed vertical lines mark the signal region of $70

png
Figure 1-c:
Distributions of the merged jet invariant mass for muons, (top) and electrons (bottom) with the projections of the relevant components overlaid. The merged jet invariant mass is plotted for all events (left), after subtraction of all components except the diboson (center) and subsequent normalized residual or pull distributions: $(\text {data} - \text {fit})/(\text {fituncertainty})$ (right). The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The dashed vertical lines mark the signal region of $70

png
Figure 1-d:
Distributions of the merged jet invariant mass for muons, (top) and electrons (bottom) with the projections of the relevant components overlaid. The merged jet invariant mass is plotted for all events (left), after subtraction of all components except the diboson (center) and subsequent normalized residual or pull distributions: $(\text {data} - \text {fit})/(\text {fituncertainty})$ (right). The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The dashed vertical lines mark the signal region of $70

png
Figure 1-e:
Distributions of the merged jet invariant mass for muons, (top) and electrons (bottom) with the projections of the relevant components overlaid. The merged jet invariant mass is plotted for all events (left), after subtraction of all components except the diboson (center) and subsequent normalized residual or pull distributions: $(\text {data} - \text {fit})/(\text {fituncertainty})$ (right). The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The dashed vertical lines mark the signal region of $70

png
Figure 1-f:
Distributions of the merged jet invariant mass for muons, (top) and electrons (bottom) with the projections of the relevant components overlaid. The merged jet invariant mass is plotted for all events (left), after subtraction of all components except the diboson (center) and subsequent normalized residual or pull distributions: $(\text {data} - \text {fit})/(\text {fituncertainty})$ (right). The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The dashed vertical lines mark the signal region of $70

png pdf
Figure 2:
V$_{had}$ $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ distributions for the muon (left) and electron (right) merged jet channels after full selection and with the requirement $70 GeV < m_{J} < 100 GeV $. The MC errors are purely statistical. The stacked histogram shapes are taken from simulation. They are normalized according to the fit to the observed spectrum in data, with the exception of the SM WV, which is normalized to the theoretical prediction. Below we show the data/MC ratio. The last bin includes the overflow.

png
Figure 2-a:
V$_{had}$ $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ distributions for the muon (left) and electron (right) merged jet channels after full selection and with the requirement $70 GeV < m_{J} < 100 GeV $. The MC errors are purely statistical. The stacked histogram shapes are taken from simulation. They are normalized according to the fit to the observed spectrum in data, with the exception of the SM WV, which is normalized to the theoretical prediction. Below we show the data/MC ratio. The last bin includes the overflow.

png
Figure 2-b:
V$_{had}$ $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ distributions for the muon (left) and electron (right) merged jet channels after full selection and with the requirement $70 GeV < m_{J} < 100 GeV $. The MC errors are purely statistical. The stacked histogram shapes are taken from simulation. They are normalized according to the fit to the observed spectrum in data, with the exception of the SM WV, which is normalized to the theoretical prediction. Below we show the data/MC ratio. The last bin includes the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 3-a:
Above are depicted the 68% and 95% CL observed and expected exclusion contours for three pairwise combinations of the anomalous triple gauge coupling parameters in the HISZ parametrization (top) and in the effective field theory formulation (bottom).

png pdf
Figure 3-b:
Above are depicted the 68% and 95% CL observed and expected exclusion contours for three pairwise combinations of the anomalous triple gauge coupling parameters in the HISZ parametrization (top) and in the effective field theory formulation (bottom).

png pdf
Figure 3-c:
Above are depicted the 68% and 95% CL observed and expected exclusion contours for three pairwise combinations of the anomalous triple gauge coupling parameters in the HISZ parametrization (top) and in the effective field theory formulation (bottom).

png pdf
Figure 3-d:
Above are depicted the 68% and 95% CL observed and expected exclusion contours for three pairwise combinations of the anomalous triple gauge coupling parameters in the HISZ parametrization (top) and in the effective field theory formulation (bottom).

png pdf
Figure 3-e:
Above are depicted the 68% and 95% CL observed and expected exclusion contours for three pairwise combinations of the anomalous triple gauge coupling parameters in the HISZ parametrization (top) and in the effective field theory formulation (bottom).

png pdf
Figure 3-f:
Above are depicted the 68% and 95% CL observed and expected exclusion contours for three pairwise combinations of the anomalous triple gauge coupling parameters in the HISZ parametrization (top) and in the effective field theory formulation (bottom).
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
Observed and expected event yields and associated fractions (in parentheses) with respect to the prefit values extracted in the signal region ($70

png pdf
Table 2:
Summary of one-dimensional limits placed on each coupling parameter. Each number pair represents the observed 95% confidence interval for that parameter.
Summary
References
1 L. J. Dixon, Z. Kunszt, and A. Signer Vector boson pair production in hadronic collisions at order $ \alpha_s $ : lepton correlations and anomalous couplings PRD 60 (1999) 114037 hep-ph/9907305
2 K. Hagiwara, S. Ishihara, R. Szalapski, and D. Zeppenfeld Low energy effects of new interactions in the electroweak boson sector PRD 48 (1993) 2182
3 C. Degrande et al. Effective Field Theory: A Modern Approach to Anomalous Couplings Annals Phys. 335 (2013) 21--32 1205.4231
4 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the sum of $ W W $ and $ WZ $ production with $ W+ $dijet events in $ pp $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}=7 $ TeV EPJC 73 (2013) 2283 CMS-SMP-12-015
1210.7544
5 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of the $ WW+WZ $ cross section and limits on anomalous triple gauge couplings using final states with one lepton, missing transverse momentum, and two jets with the ATLAS detector at $ \sqrt{\rm{s}} = 7 $ TeV JHEP 01 (2015) 049 1410.7238
6 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the $ \text{W}^+\text{W}^- $ cross section in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV and limits on anomalous gauge couplings EPJC 76 (2016), no. 7, 401 CMS-SMP-14-016
1507.03268
7 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of total and differential $ W^+W^- $ production cross sections in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector and limits on anomalous triple-gauge-boson couplings JHEP 09 (2016) 029 1603.01702
8 CMS Collaboration The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 3 (2008) S08004
9 J. Alwall et al. MadGraph 5: going beyond JHEP 06 (2011) 128 1106.0522
10 P. Nason A New method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms JHEP 11 (2004) 040 hep-ph/0409146
11 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari Matching NLO QCD computations with Parton Shower simulations: the POWHEG method JHEP 11 (2007) 070 0709.2092
12 S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX JHEP 06 (2010) 043 1002.2581
13 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and G. Ridolfi A Positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction JHEP 09 (2007) 126 0707.3088
14 S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re NLO single-top production matched with shower in POWHEG: s- and t-channel contributions JHEP 09 (2009) 111 0907.4076
15 J. Alwall et al. The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations JHEP 07 (2014) 079 1405.0301
16 T. Sj\"ostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands PYTHIA 6.4 Physics and Manual JHEP 05 (2006) 026 hep-ph/0603175
17 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the underlying event activity at the LHC with $ \sqrt{s}= 7 $ TeV and comparison with $ \sqrt{s} = 0.9 $ TeV JHEP 09 (2011) 109 CMS-QCD-10-010
1107.0330
18 J. Pumplin et al. New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from global QCD analysis JHEP 07 (2002) 012 hep-ph/0201195
19 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT4---a simulation toolkit NIMA 506 (2003) 250
20 CMS Collaboration Particle-Flow Event Reconstruction in CMS and Performance for Jets, Taus, and MET Technical Report CMS-PAS-PFT-09-001, CERN, Geneva, Apr
21 CMS Collaboration Commissioning of the Particle-flow Event Reconstruction with the first LHC collisions recorded in the CMS detector Technical Report CMS-PAS-PFT-10-001, CERN, Geneva
22 CMS Collaboration The performance of the CMS muon detector in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV at the LHC JINST 8 (2013) P11002 CMS-MUO-11-001
1306.6905
23 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
24 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The anti-$ k_t $ jet clustering algorithm JHEP 04 (2008) 063 0802.1189
25 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez FastJet User Manual EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 1111.6097
26 Y. L. Dokshitzer, G. Leder, S. Moretti, and B. Webber Better jet clustering algorithms JHEP 08 (1997) 001 hep-ph/9707323
27 CMS Collaboration Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment JINST 8 (2013) P04013 CMS-BTV-12-001
1211.4462
28 CMS Collaboration Studies of jet mass in dijet and W/Z+jet events JHEP 05 (2013) 090 CMS-SMP-12-019
1303.4811
29 S. D. Ellis, C. K. Vermilion, and J. R. Walsh Recombination algorithms and jet substructure: pruning as a tool for heavy particle searches PRD 81 (2010) 094023 0912.0033
30 J. Thaler and K. Van Tilburg Identifying boosted objects with N-subjettiness JHEP 03 (2011) 015 1011.2268
31 CMS Collaboration Search for massive resonances decaying into pairs of boosted bosons in semi-leptonic final states at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV JHEP 08 (2014) 174 CMS-EXO-13-009
1405.3447
32 Particle Data Group The review of particle physics CPC 38 (2014) 090001
33 CMS Collaboration Search for a Higgs Boson in the Mass Range from 145 to 1000 GeV Decaying to a Pair of W or Z Bosons JHEP 10 (2015) 144 CMS-HIG-13-031
1504.00936
34 J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis MCFM for the Tevatron and the LHC NPPS 205--206 (2010) 10 1007.3492
35 CMS Collaboration CMS Luminosity Based on Pixel Cluster Counting - Summer 2013 Update
36 ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, LHC Higgs Combination Group Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011 Technical Report ATL-PHYS-PUB 2011-11, CMS-NOTE 2011-005
37 DELPHI, OPAL, LEP Electroweak, ALEPH, L3 Collaboration Electroweak measurements in electron-positron collisions at W-boson-pair energies at LEP PR 532 (2013) 119 1302.3415
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN