CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-TOP-14-013 ; CERN-EP-2017-030
Measurement of double-differential cross sections for top quark pair production in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV and impact on parton distribution functions
EPJC 77 (2017) 459
Abstract: Normalized double-differential cross sections for top quark pair ($ \mathrm{ 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 in the dilepton $\mathrm{ e }^{\pm}\mu^{\mp}$ final state. The $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ cross section is determined as a function of various pairs of observables characterizing the kinematics of the top quark and $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ system. The data are compared to calculations using perturbative quantum chromodynamics at next-to-leading and approximate next-to-next-to-leading orders. They are also compared to predictions of Monte Carlo event generators that complement fixed-order computations with parton showers, hadronization, and multiple-parton interactions. Overall agreement is observed with the predictions, which is improved when the latest global sets of proton parton distribution functions are used. The inclusion of the measured $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ cross sections in a fit of parametrized parton distribution functions is shown to have significant impact on the gluon distribution.
Figures & Tables Summary References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
Distributions of $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} (\mathrm{ t } )$ (upper left), $y(\mathrm{ t } )$ (upper right), $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (middle left), $y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ (middle right), and ${M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )}$ (lower) in selected events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to their statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The hatched regions correspond to the shape uncertainties in the signal and backgrounds (cf. Section 7). 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_{\mathrm {T}}} (\mathrm{ t } )$ in selected events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to their statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The hatched regions correspond to the shape uncertainties in the signal and backgrounds (cf. Section 7). The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-b:
Distributions of $y(\mathrm{ t } )$ in selected events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to their statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The hatched regions correspond to the shape uncertainties in the signal and backgrounds (cf. Section 7). The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-c:
Distributions of $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ in selected events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to their statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The hatched regions correspond to the shape uncertainties in the signal and backgrounds (cf. Section 7). The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-d:
Distributions of $y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )$ in selected events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to their statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The hatched regions correspond to the shape uncertainties in the signal and backgrounds (cf. Section 7). The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data event yields to those expected in the simulation.

png pdf
Figure 1-e:
Distributions of ${M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )}$ in selected events after the kinematic reconstruction. The experimental data with the vertical bars corresponding to their statistical uncertainties are plotted together with distributions of simulated signal and different background processes. The hatched regions correspond to the shape uncertainties in the signal and backgrounds (cf. Section 7). The lower panel 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} } } $ double-differential cross section as a function of $ { {p_{\mathrm {T}}} (\mathrm{ t } )} $ in different $ {| {y(\mathrm{ 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 of the data and other simulations to the MadGraph+PYTHIA6 (MG+P) predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 3:
Comparison of the measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross section as a function of $ {| {y(\mathrm{ 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} } } $ double-differential cross section 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} } } $ double-differential cross section 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} } } $ double-differential cross section 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} } } $ double-differential cross section 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} } } $ double-differential cross section as a function of $ { {p_{\mathrm {T}}} (\mathrm{ t } )} $ in different $ {| {y(\mathrm{ t } )} | }$ ranges to NLO $\mathcal{O}(\alpha _s^3)$ (MNR) predictions calculated with CT14 and HERAPDF2.0 , and approximate NNLO $\mathcal{O}(\alpha _s^4)$ (DiffTop) prediction calculated with CT14 . 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 shows the scale uncertainties ($\mu $) for the NLO predictions using CT14 , while the dark band includes also the PDF uncertainties added in quadrature ($\mu + \mathrm {PDF}$). The dotted line shows the NLO predictions calculated with HERAPDF2.0 . The dashed line shows the approximate NNLO predictions calculated with CT14 . In the bottom panel, the ratios of the data and other calculations to the NLO prediction using CT14 are shown.

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

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

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

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

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

png pdf
Figure 14:
The gluon (upper left), sea quark (upper right), u valence quark (lower left), and d valence quark (lower right) PDFs at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the HERA DIS and CMS $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry measurements only. The shaded, hatched, and dotted areas represent the total uncertainty in each of the fits.

png pdf
Figure 14-a:
The gluon PDF at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the HERA DIS and CMS $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry measurements only. The shaded, hatched, and dotted areas represent the total uncertainty in each of the fits.

png pdf
Figure 14-b:
The sea quark PDF at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the HERA DIS and CMS $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry measurements only. The shaded, hatched, and dotted areas represent the total uncertainty in each of the fits.

png pdf
Figure 14-c:
The u valence quark PDF at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the HERA DIS and CMS $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry measurements only. The shaded, hatched, and dotted areas represent the total uncertainty in each of the fits.

png pdf
Figure 14-d:
The d valence quark PDF at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit, normalized to the results from the fit using the HERA DIS and CMS $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry measurements only. The shaded, hatched, and dotted areas represent the total uncertainty in each of the fits.

png pdf
Figure 15:
Relative total uncertainties of the gluon (upper left), sea quark (upper right), u valence quark (lower left), and d valence quark (lower right) distributions at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, shown by shaded, hatched, and dotted areas, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit.

png pdf
Figure 15-a:
Relative total uncertainties of the gluon distribution at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, shown by shaded, hatched, and dotted areas, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit.

png pdf
Figure 15-b:
Relative total uncertainties of the sea quark distribution at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, shown by shaded, hatched, and dotted areas, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit.

png pdf
Figure 15-c:
Relative total uncertainties of the u valence quark distribution at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, shown by shaded, hatched, and dotted areas, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit.

png pdf
Figure 15-d:
Relative total uncertainties of the d valence quark distribution at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, shown by shaded, hatched, and dotted areas, as obtained in all variants of the PDF fit.

png pdf
Figure 16:
The gluon distribution at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained from the PDF fit to the HERA DIS data and CMS $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry measurements (shaded area), the CMS inclusive jet production cross sections (hatched area), and the $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry plus the double-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross section (dotted area). All presented PDFs are normalized to the results from the fit using the DIS and $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry measurements. The shaded, hatched, and dotted areas represent the total uncertainty in each of the fits.

png pdf
Figure 17:
The same as in Fig. 15 for the variants of the PDF fit using the single-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 17-a:
The same as in Fig. 15-a for the variants of the PDF fit using the single-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 17-b:
The same as in Fig. 15-b for the variants of the PDF fit using the single-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 17-c:
The same as in Fig. 15-c for the variants of the PDF fit using the single-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 17-d:
The same as in Fig. 15-d for the variants of the PDF fit using the single-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 18:
Relative total uncertainties of the gluon distribution at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$^2$, shown by shaded (or hatched) bands, as obtained in the PDF fit using the DIS and $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry data only, as well as single- and double-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections.

png pdf
Figure 19:
The gluon distribution (left) and its fractional total uncertainty (right) at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained in the PDF fit at NNLO using the DIS and $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry data only, as well as $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ cross sections. The distributions shown in the left panel are normalized to the results from the fit using the DIS and $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry data only. The total uncertainty of each distribution is shown by a shaded (or hatched) band.

png pdf
Figure 19-a:
The gluon distribution at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained in the PDF fit at NNLO using the DIS and $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry data only, as well as $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ cross sections. The distributions shown are normalized to the results from the fit using the DIS and $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry data only. The total uncertainty of each distribution is shown by a shaded (or hatched) band.

png pdf
Figure 19-b:
The fractional total uncertainty of the gluon distribution at $\mu _\mathrm {f}^2= $ 30 000 GeV$ ^2$, as obtained in the PDF fit at NNLO using the DIS and $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry data only, as well as $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ cross sections. The total uncertainty of each distribution is shown by a shaded (or hatched) band.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
The $ {\chi ^2} $ values and dof of the measured normalized double-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections with respect to the various MC predictions.

png pdf
Table 2:
The $ {\chi ^2} $ values and dof of the double-differential normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections with respect to NLO $\mathcal{O}(\alpha _s^3)$ theoretical calculations [18] using different PDF sets. The $ {\chi ^2} $ values that include PDF uncertainties are shown in parentheses.

png pdf
Table 3:
The $ {\chi ^2} $ values and dof of the double-differential normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross sections with respect to approximate NNLO $\mathcal{O}(\alpha _s^4)$ theoretical calculations [19,4,69,70] using different PDF sets.

png pdf
Table 4:
The global and partial $ {\chi ^2} $/dof values for all variants of the PDF fit. The variant of the fit that uses the DIS and $ {\mathrm{ W } ^\pm } $ boson charge asymmetry data only is denoted as `Nominal fit'. Each double-differential $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ cross section is added ($+$) to the nominal data, one at a time. For the HERA measurements, the energy of the proton beam, $E_{\mathrm{ p } }$, is listed for each data set, with the electron energy being $E_{\mathrm{ e } }=27.5 GeV $, CC and NC stand for charged and neutral current, respectively. The correlated $ {\chi ^2} $ and the log-penalty $\chi ^2$ entries refer to the $ {\chi ^2} $ contributions from the nuisance parameters and from the logarithmic term, respectively, as described in the text.

png pdf
Table 5:
The measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections in different bins of $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ and $ { {p_{\mathrm {T}}} (\mathrm{ t } )} $ , along with their relative statistical and systematic uncertainties.

png pdf
Table 6:
The correlation matrix of statistical uncertainties for the normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ and $ { {p_{\mathrm {T}}} (\mathrm{ t } )} $ . The values are expressed as percentages. For bin indices see Table 5.

png pdf
Table 7:
Sources and values of the relative systematic uncertainties in percent of the measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ and $ { {p_{\mathrm {T}}} (\mathrm{ t } )} $ . For bin indices see Table 5.

png pdf
Table 8:
The measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections in different bins of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ , along with their relative statistical and systematic uncertainties.

png pdf
Table 9:
The correlation matrix of statistical uncertainties for the normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ . The values are expressed as percentages. For bin indices see Table 8.

png pdf
Table 10:
Sources and values of the relative systematic uncertainties in percent of the measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {y(\mathrm{ t } )} $ . For bin indices see Table 8.

png pdf
Table 11:
The measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections in different bins of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ , along with their relative statistical and systematic uncertainties.

png pdf
Table 12:
The correlation matrix of statistical uncertainties for the normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ . The values are expressed as percentages. For bin indices see Table 11.

png pdf
Table 13:
Sources and values of the relative systematic uncertainties in percent of the measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {y({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ . For bin indices see Table 11.

png pdf
Table 14:
The measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections in different bins of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {\Delta \eta (\mathrm{ t } ,\mathrm{ \bar{t} } )} $ , along with their relative statistical and systematic uncertainties.

png pdf
Table 15:
The correlation matrix of statistical uncertainties for the normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {\Delta \eta (\mathrm{ t } ,\mathrm{ \bar{t} } )} $ . The values are expressed as percentages. For bin indices see Table 14.

png pdf
Table 16:
Sources and values of the relative systematic uncertainties in percent of the measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {\Delta \eta (\mathrm{ t } ,\mathrm{ \bar{t} } )} $ . For bin indices see Table 14.

png pdf
Table 17:
The measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections in different bins of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ { {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ , along with their relative statistical and systematic uncertainties.

png pdf
Table 18:
The correlation matrix of statistical uncertainties for the normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ { {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ . The values are expressed as percentages. For bin indices see Table 17.

png pdf
Table 19:
Sources and values of the relative systematic uncertainties in percent of the measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ { {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ . For bin indices see Table 17.

png pdf
Table 20:
The measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections in different bins of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {\Delta \phi (\mathrm{ t } ,\mathrm{ \bar{t} } )} $ , along with their relative statistical and systematic uncertainties.

png pdf
Table 21:
The correlation matrix of statistical uncertainties for the normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {\Delta \phi (\mathrm{ t } ,\mathrm{ \bar{t} } )} $ . The values are expressed as percentages. For bin indices see Table 20.

png pdf
Table 22:
Sources and values of the relative systematic uncertainties in percent of the measured normalized $ {\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } $ double-differential cross sections as a function of $ {M({\mathrm{ t } {}\mathrm{ \bar{t} } } )} $ and $ {\Delta \phi (\mathrm{ t } ,\mathrm{ \bar{t} } )} $ . For bin indices see Table 20.
Summary
A measurement of normalized double-differential $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ production cross sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV has been presented. The measurement is performed in the $\mathrm{ e }^{\pm}\mu^{\mp}$ final state, using data collected with the CMS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 19.7 fb$^{-1}$. The normalized $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ cross section is measured in the full phase space as a function of different pairs of kinematic variables describing the top quark or $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ system. None of the tested MC models is able to correctly describe all the double-differential distributions. The data exhibit a softer transverse momentum $p_{\mathrm{T}}({\mathrm{t}})$ distribution, compared to the Monte Carlo predictions, as was reported in previous single-differential $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ cross section measurements. The double-differential studies reveal a broader distribution of rapidity $y({\mathrm{t}})$ at high $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ invariant mass $ M(\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }) $ and a larger pseudorapidity separation $ \Delta \eta (\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }) $ at moderate $ M(\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }) $ in data compared to simulation. The data are in reasonable agreement with next-to-leading-order predictions of quantum chromodynamics using recent sets of parton distribution functions (PDFs).

The measured double-differential cross sections have been incorporated into a PDF fit, together with other data from HERA and the LHC. Including the $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ data, one observes a significant reduction in the uncertainties in the gluon distribution at large values of parton momentum fraction $x$, in particular when using the double-differential $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ cross section as a function of $ y (\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }) $ and $ M(\mathrm{ t \bar{t} }) $. The constraints provided by these data are competitive with those from inclusive jet data. This improvement exceeds that from using single-differential $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ cross section data, thus strongly suggesting the use of the double-differential $ \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } $ measurements in PDF fits.
References
1 D0 Collaboration Observation of the Top Quark PRL 74 (1995) 2632 hep-ex/9503003
2 CDF Collaboration Observation of Top Quark Production in $ {\bar{p}p} $ Collisions PRL 74 (1995) 2626 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. Moch Top-quark pair production at hadron colliders: differential cross section and phenomenological applications with DIFFTOP JHEP 01 (2015) 082 1406.0386
5 M. Czakon et al. Pinning down the large-x gluon with NNLO top-quark pair differential distributions 1611.08609
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) 112002 CMS-QCD-11-004
1212.6660
7 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 TeV EPJC 75 (2015) 288 CMS-SMP-12-028
1410.6765
8 CMS Collaboration Measurement and QCD analysis of double-differential inclusive jet cross-sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV and ratios to 2.76 and 7 TeV Submitted to JHEP CMS-SMP-14-001
1609.05331
9 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
10 D0 Collaboration Measurement of differential $ \rm{t\bar{t}} $ production cross sections in $ \rm{p\bar{p}} $ collisions PRD 90 (2014) 092006 1401.5785
11 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
12 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
13 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
14 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 PRD 94 (2016) 092003 1607.07281
15 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the differential cross section for top quark pair production in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV EPJC 75 (2015) 542 CMS-TOP-12-028
1505.04480
16 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 EPJC 76 (2016) 538 1511.04716
17 CMS Collaboration Measurement of differential cross sections for top quark pair production using the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV Submitted to PRD CMS-TOP-16-008
1610.04191
18 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
19 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
20 CMS Collaboration The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 3 (2008) S08004 CMS-00-001
21 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
22 P. Artoisenet, R. Frederix, O. Mattelaer, and R. Rietkerk Automatic spin-entangled decays of heavy resonances in Monte Carlo simulations JHEP 03 (2013) 015 1212.3460
23 T. Sj\"ostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual JHEP 05 (2006) 026 hep-ph/0603175
24 J. Pumplin et al. New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from global QCD analysis JHEP 07 (2002) 012 hep-ph/0201195
25 P. Nason A New method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms JHEP 11 (2004) 040 hep-ph/0409146
26 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method JHEP 11 (2007) 070 0709.2092
27 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
28 G. Corcella et al. HERWIG 6: an event generator for hadron emission reactions with interfering gluons (including supersymmetric processes) JHEP 01 (2001) 010 hep-ph/0011363
29 S. Frixione and B. R. Webber Matching NLO QCD computations and parton shower simulations JHEP 06 (2002) 029 hep-ph/0204244
30 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
31 ATLAS Collaboration ATLAS tunes of PYTHIA 6 and Pythia 8 for MC11 ATLAS PUB note ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-009
32 H.-L. Lai et al. New parton distributions for collider physics PRD 82 (2010) 074024 1007.2241
33 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT4---a simulation toolkit NIMA 506 (2003) 250
34 CMS Collaboration Particle--Flow Event Reconstruction in CMS and Performance for Jets, Taus, and $ E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}} $ CDS
35 CMS Collaboration Commissioning of the Particle-flow Event Reconstruction with the first LHC collisions recorded in the CMS detector CDS
36 CMS Collaboration CMS tracking performance results from early LHC operation EPJC 70 (2010) 1165 CMS-TRK-10-001
1007.1988
37 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The catchment area of jets JHEP 04 (2008) 005 0802.1188
38 CMS Collaboration Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV JINST 10 (2015) P06005 CMS-EGM-13-001
1502.02701
39 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
40 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The anti-$ k_t $ jet clustering algorithm JHEP 04 (2008) 063 0802.1189
41 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez FastJet user manual EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 1111.6097
42 CMS Collaboration Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment JINST 8 (2013) P04013 CMS-BTV-12-001
1211.4462
43 CMS Collaboration Missing transverse energy performance of the CMS detector JINST 6 (2011) P09001 CMS-JME-10-009
1106.5048
44 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
45 D0 Collaboration Measurement of the Top Quark Mass Using Dilepton Events PRL 80 (1998) 2063 hep-ex/9706014
46 L. Sonnenschein Analytical solution of $ {\rm t}\bar{{\rm t}} $ dilepton equations PRD 73 (2006) 054015 hep-ph/0603011
47 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 (2016)
48 S. Schmitt TUnfold: an algorithm for correcting migration effects in high energy physics JINST 7 (2012) T10003 1205.6201
49 A. N. Tikhonov Solution of incorrectly formulated problems and the regularization method Soviet Math. Dokl. 4 (1963) 1035
50 S. Schmitt Data Unfolding Methods in High Energy Physics 1611.01927
51 Particle Data Group Collaboration Review of Particle Physics CPC 40 (2016) 100001
52 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
53 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
54 CMS Collaboration Determination of jet energy calibration and transverse momentum resolution in CMS JINST 6 (2011) P11002 CMS-JME-10-011
1107.4277
55 CMS Collaboration CMS Luminosity Based on Pixel Cluster Counting - Summer 2013 Update CMS-PAS-LUM-13-001 CMS-PAS-LUM-13-001
56 M. Czakon, D. Heymes, and A. Mitov High-precision differential predictions for top-quark pairs at the LHC PRL 116 (2016) 082003 1511.00549
57 M. Czakon, D. Heymes, and A. Mitov Dynamical scales for multi-TeV top-pair production at the LHC 1606.03350
58 N. Kidonakis NNNLO soft-gluon corrections for the top-quark $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ and rapidity distributions PRD 91 (2015) 031501 1411.2633
59 J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis MCFM for the Tevatron and the LHC NPPS 205-206 (2010) 10 1007.3492
60 S. Alekhin, J. Bl\"umlein, and S. Moch Parton distribution functions and benchmark cross sections at NNLO PRD 86 (2012) 054009 1202.2281
61 A. Accardi et al. Constraints on large-$ x $ parton distributions from new weak boson production and deep-inelastic scattering data PRD 93 (2016) 114017 1602.03154
62 S. Dulat et al. New parton distribution functions from a global analysis of quantum chromodynamics PRD 93 (2016) 033006 1506.07443
63 H1 and ZEUS Collaborations Combination of measurements of inclusive deep inelastic $ {{\rm e}^{\pm}{\rm p}} $ scattering cross sections and QCD analysis of HERA data EPJC 75 (2015) 580 1506.06042
64 P. Jimenez-Delgado and E. Reya Delineating parton distributions and the strong coupling PRD 89 (2014) 074049 1403.1852
65 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) 204 1412.3989
66 NNPDF Collaboration Parton distributions for the LHC Run II JHEP 04 (2015) 040 1410.8849
67 A. Buckley et al. LHAPDFf6: parton density access in the LHC precision era EPJC 75 (2015) 132 1412.7420
68 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
69 M. Guzzi, K. Lipka, and S. Moch Differential cross sections for top pair production at the LHC Nuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings (2015) NPPP601 1409.0444
70 M. Guzzi, K. Lipka, and S. Moch Top-quark production at the LHC: differential cross section and phenomenological applications in Proceedings, 21st International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects (DIS 2013), p. 049 2013 [PoS(DIS 2013)049] 1308.1635
71 S. Alekhin, J. Bl\"umlein, and S. Moch The ABM parton distributions tuned to LHC data PRD 89 (2014) 054028 1310.3059
72 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the differential cross section and charge asymmetry for inclusive $ \mathrm {p}\mathrm {p}\rightarrow \mathrm {W}^{\pm }+X $ production at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV EPJC 76 (2016) 469 CMS-SMP-14-022
1603.01803
73 S. Alekhin et al. HERAFitter EPJC 75 (2015) 304 1410.4412
74 Y. L. Dokshitzer Calculation of the Structure Functions for Deep Inelastic Scattering and e+ e- Annihilation by Perturbation Theory in Quantum Chromodynamics Sov. Phys. JETP 46 (1977)641
75 V. N. Gribov and L. N. Lipatov Deep inelastic ep scattering in perturbation theory Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 15 (1972)438
76 G. Altarelli and G. Parisi Asymptotic freedom in parton language Nucl. Phys. B 126 (1977) 298
77 G. Curci, W. Furmanski, and R. Petronzio Evolution of parton densities beyond leading order: the nonsinglet case Nucl. Phys. B 175 (1980) 27
78 W. Furmanski and R. Petronzio Singlet parton densities beyond leading order PLB 97 (1980) 437
79 S. Moch, J. A. M. Vermaseren, and A. Vogt The three-loop splitting functions in QCD: the nonsinglet case Nucl. Phys. B 688 (2004) 101 hep-ph/0403192
80 A. Vogt, S. Moch, and J. A. M. Vermaseren The three-loop splitting functions in QCD: the singlet case Nucl. Phys. B 691 (2004) 129 hep-ph/0404111
81 M. Botje QCDNUM: Fast QCD evolution and convolution CPC 182 (2011) 490 1005.1481
82 R. S. Thorne and R. G. Roberts An ordered analysis of heavy flavor production in deep inelastic scattering PRD 57 (1998) 6871 hep-ph/9709442
83 R. S. Thorne A variable-flavor number scheme for NNLO PRD 73 (2006) 054019 hep-ph/0601245
84 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
85 J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis An update on vector boson pair production at hadron colliders PRD 60 (1999) 113006 hep-ph/9905386
86 T. Carli et al. A posteriori inclusion of parton density functions in NLO QCD final-state calculations at hadron colliders: The APPLGRIDproject EPJC 66 (2010) 503 0911.2985
87 A. D. Martin, W. J. Stirling, R. S. Thorne, and G. Watt Parton distributions for the LHC EPJC 63 (2009) 189 0901.0002
88 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the muon charge asymmetry in inclusive $ \rm{pp} \to \rm{W}+\rm{X} $ production at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV and an improved determination of light parton distribution functions PRD 90 (2014) 032004 CMS-SMP-12-021
1312.6283
89 H1 Collaboration Inclusive deep inelastic scattering at high $ Q^2 $ with longitudinally polarised lepton beams at HERA JHEP 09 (2012) 061 1206.7007
90 D. Britzger, K. Rabbertz, F. Stober, and M. Wobisch New features in version 2 of the FastNLO project in Proceedings, XX. International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects (DIS 2012) Bonn, Germany 1208.3641
91 Y. Li and F. Petriello Combining QCD and electroweak corrections to dilepton production in FEWZ PRD 86 (2012) 094034 1208.5967
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN