Measurement of the total and differential Higgs boson production cross-sections at p s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector by combining the H ! ZZ ! 4` and H ! decay channels

JHEP05(2023)028 Published for SISSA by Springer Received:July 19, 2022 Accepted:January 13, 2023 Published:May 4, 2023 Measurement of the total and differential Higgs boson production cross-sections at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector by combining the H→ZZ∗→4` and H→γγ decay channels The ATLAS collaboration E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The total and differential Higgs boson production cross-sections are measured through a combined statistical analysis of the H→ZZ∗→4`and H→γγ decay channels. The results are based on a dataset of 139 fb−1of proton–proton collisions at a centre-ofmass energy of 13TeV, recorded by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The measured total Higgs boson production cross-section is 55.5+4.0 −3.8pb, consistent with the Standard Model prediction of 55.6±2.5pb. All results from the two decay channels are compatible with each other, and their combination agrees with the Standard Model predictions. A combined statistical interpretation of the measured fiducial cross-sections as a function of the Higgs boson transverse momentum is performed in order to probe the Yukawa couplings to the bottom and charm quarks. A similar interpretation is performed by including also the constraints from the measurements of Higgs boson production in association with a Wor Zboson in the H→b¯ band c¯cdecay channels. Keywords: Hadron-Hadron Scattering, Higgs Physics ArXiv ePrint: 2207.08615 Open Access, Copyright CERN, for the benefit of the ATLAS Collaboration. Article funded by SCOAP3. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2023)028 JHEP05(2023)028 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Higgs boson simulation samples and theoretical predictions 3 3 Acceptance factors 4 4 Statistical procedure 6 5 Results 7 6 Constraints on the band c-quark Yukawa couplings 9 6.1 Constraints from the Higgs boson transverse momentum distributions 12 6.2 Combination with the constraints from V H(b¯ b)and V H(c¯c)production 14 7 Conclusions 15 A Correlation matrices between the measured cross-sections 18 The ATLAS collaboration 24 1 Introduction Following the discovery of a Higgs boson (H) with a mass around 125GeV ten years ago [1,2], by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN, an intense programme to measure the properties of this particle and compare them with those of the Higgs boson predicted by the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics [3,4] has been carried out. In particular, total and differential fiducial Higgs boson production cross-sections have been measured, probing the kinematic features of the Higgs boson and of the particles produced in association with it. Both the ATLAS and CMS collaborations have measured total and differential fiducial Higgs boson production cross-sections at a proton–proton (pp) centre-of-mass energy √s= 13 TeV in the H→ZZ∗→4`(where `=e, µ) [5,6], H→γγ [7,8], H→WW∗→eνµν [9], and H→ττ [10] decay channels. The collaborations have also performed combinations of some of the most sensitive results [11,12]. The measurements are performed in fiducial phase spaces that closely match the selection requirements of the detector-level analysis after the event reconstruction. This approach significantly reduces the model dependence that would otherwise be introduced by relying on the acceptance factors predicted by the model under consideration to extrapolate the measured signal yields to the full phase space. – 1 – JHEP05(2023)028 The most recent measurements of these cross-sections published by the ATLAS collaboration, exploiting 139 fb−1[13,14] of 13 TeV proton–proton collisions produced during the whole second data-taking phase of the LHC (Run 2, 2015–2018) and recorded by the ATLAS detector [15], have been performed using the H→ZZ∗→4`[5] and H→γγ [7] final states. The results of these two publications are combined in this article. The measurements are extrapolated to the full phase space and the measured cross-sections are compared with SM predictions. Additional systematic uncertainties introduced by the extrapolation to the full phase space are counterbalanced by a significant reduction of the statistical uncertainty of the measurement, which is the main limitation to the precision of the measurements in the individual decay channels. The measurements include the total production cross-section and one and twodimensional differential production cross-sections as a function of the Higgs boson transverse momentum1pH T, sensitive to perturbative QCD calculations, and of the Higgs boson rapidity |yH|, sensitive to the parton distribution functions (PDF). Furthermore, differential cross-sections for jet multiplicity Njets and the transverse momentum of the highest-pT jet plead.jet Tare also measured. Both Njets and plead.jet Tobservables probe the theoretical modelling of high-pTQCD radiation in Higgs boson production. These distributions are also sensitive to the different Higgs boson production processes. The measurements provide a stringent test of the SM predictions and any deviations from these predictions can indicate the presence of physics beyond the SM (BSM). This article also presents a combined statistical interpretation, in terms of the band c-quark Yukawa coupling strengths to the Higgs boson, of the fiducial differential crosssections measured as a function of pH Tin the two decay channels. Another interpretation, also including the constraints on the band cYukawa coupling strengths obtained from the measurements of Higgs boson production in association with a Wor Zboson, with the Higgs boson decaying to bor c-quark pairs [16,17], is presented. The results presented in this article update and supersede those of a previous publication [11] based on the same final states and a partial Run 2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb−1. With respect to the previous publication, both measurements included in this article use an improved jet reconstruction [18] and an improved unfolding procedure that is based on a detector response matrix included in the likelihood fit. Full descriptions of the measurements and the respective improvements in the H→ZZ∗→4`and H→γγ decay channels used in this article are given in refs. [5,7]. In both decay channels, the cross-sections in the full phase space are obtained from these unfolded yields by taking into account the luminosity, detector effects, acceptance factors, and branching fractions. The SM values of the Higgs boson branching fractions are as1ATLAS uses a right-handed coordinate system with its origin at the nominal interaction point (IP) in the centre of the detector and the z-axis along the beam pipe. The x-axis points from the IP to the centre of the LHC ring, and the y-axis points upward. Cylindrical coordinates (r, φ)are used in the transverse plane, φbeing the azimuthal angle around the z-axis. The pseudorapidity is defined in terms of the polar angle θas η=−ln tan(θ/2). The rapidity of a particle of energy Eand longitudinal momentum pzis defined as y=1 2ln E+pz E−pz. – 2 – JHEP05(2023)028 sumed, and the acceptance factors are based on SM predictions. The value of the Higgs boson mass is assumed to be 125.09 GeV [19]. The paper is organised as follows. Section 2describes the simulated Higgs boson event samples and inclusive theory cross-section calculations used to obtain the total and fiducial cross-section predictions. The signal acceptance factors for extrapolating the results to the full phase space are detailed in section 3. The statistical procedure for the combination of the two channels is illustrated in section 4, yielding the results summarised in section 5. The differential cross-sections measured as a function of pH Tare then used to constrain the Yukawa couplings of the Higgs boson to the bottom and charm quarks in section 6. 2 Higgs boson simulation samples and theoretical predictions The Monte Carlo (MC) event generators used for the calculation of the acceptance factors and detector effects, and for the SM predictions, are described in detail in refs. [5,7]. Their main features are summarised in this section. Gluon–gluon fusion (ggF) events are simulated using Powheg NNLOPS [20–30] with the PDF4LHC15 next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) set of parton distribution functions [31], while other production modes are simulated with Powheg [20–22] with the PDF4LHC15 next-to-leading order (NLO) set except for b¯ bH and tH, which are simulated using MadGraph5_aMC@NLO [32,33] with the NNPDF3.0 NLO PDF set [34]. These samples are generated assuming a Higgs boson with a mass mH= 125 GeV and are normalised to cross-sections obtained from the best available predictions as provided by the LHC Higgs Working Group [35] for mH= 125.09 GeV, which are 48.5±2.4pb, 3.78 ±0.08 pb, 2.25 ±0.06 pb, 0.49 ±0.11 pb and 0.59 ±0.05 pb for the ggF,VBF,V H, b¯ bH and t¯ tH +tH processes respectively. In the case of the ggF NNLOPS prediction, this corresponds to a rescaling to the fixed order N3LO cross-section by a global K-factor of 1.1. The impact of the 90 MeV difference between the values of mHused in the simulation and in the analysis is negligible, as discussed in section 3. For all production mechanisms the Pythia 8.2 generator [36] is used to model the H→ZZ∗→4`and H→γγ decays, as well as for the parton shower and the underlying event. The AZNLO set of tuned parameters [37] is used for ggF,VBF and V H production, while the A14 tune [38] is used for the other production modes. Alternative ggF,VBF, V H,tH (t¯ tH) samples are produced by interfacing the nominal matrix element generator with Herwig 7.1.3 (Herwig 7.0.4) [39,40], using the H7UE set of tuned parameters [40], in order to estimate uncertainties in the signal acceptance factors related to the modelling of the parton shower. The measurements are also compared with an alternative prediction obtained by summing the expected cross-sections of non-ggF Higgs boson production processes described previously and an alternative SM ggF prediction obtained using MadGraph5_aMC@NLO (MG5 FxFx). This matrix-element generator provides NLO accuracy in QCD for zero, one, and two additional jets, using the FxFx merging scheme [32,41], and includes the top and bottom quark mass effects [42–44]. The events are generated using the NNPDF30 NLO PDF set. The generator is interfaced to Pythia 8 for the – 3 – JHEP05(2023)028 modelling of the parton shower. The predicted cross-sections are scaled by a global N3LO K-factor of 1.47. Uncertainties in the predicted ggF,VBF,V H and t¯ tH cross-sections induced by PDF uncertainties are estimated by varying the PDF4LHC set according to its eigenvectors [31], and summing in quadrature the variations in the predictions. The effect of PDF variations on the tH and b¯ bH cross-sections has a negligible impact on the total uncertainty and is not included. Uncertainties due to missing higher-order QCD effects for the ggF NNLOPS,VBF, V H and t¯ tH predicted cross-sections are estimated using the same scheme as in refs. [5,7]: parameters accounting for cross-section and migration effects across various Higgs boson kinematic and associated jet observables are used and their variations are summed in quadrature. For other production modes, uncertainties related to missing higher-order QCD effects are estimated by varying the renormalisation and factorisation scales by factors of 0.5 and 2.0, and computing the difference between the envelope of the alternative predictions and the nominal one. The Higgs boson branching ratios for mH= 125.09 GeV are assumed to be those of the SM, (0.0125 ±0.0003)% for the four-lepton final state and (0.227 ±0.007)% for the diphoton final state [35]. 3 Acceptance factors The acceptance factors that extrapolate at particle-level from the respective H→ZZ∗→ 4`and H→γγ fiducial phase spaces to the full phase space are estimated using the simulated event samples and cross-sections described in section 2. The definitions of the fiducial phase spaces are summarised in table 1and table 2, with more details provided in refs. [5,7] respectively. The evaluation of the acceptance factors assumes SM Higgs boson production fractions and a Higgs boson mass of 125 GeV: the 90 MeV difference from the measured mass value of 125.09 GeV has a negligible impact on the Higgs boson kinematics. In the full phase space, the quantities pH Tand |yH|are computed directly from the simulated Higgs boson momentum instead of its decay products, as in the fiducial analyses. The acceptance factors implicitly include the correction for this difference. Simulated particle-level jets are built from all stable particles with cτ > 10 mm, including neutrinos, photons, and leptons from hadron decays or produced in the shower. All decay products from the Higgs boson decay and the leptonic decays of associated vector bosons are removed from the inputs to the jet algorithm. Jets are reconstructed using the anti-ktalgorithm [45] with a radius parameter R= 0.4, and are required to have pT>30 GeV. Theory uncertainties related to the PDF, higher-order corrections, and the parton shower model are taken into account when evaluating acceptance factors. For each channel, the uncertainties in the acceptance factors are correlated with the impact of these theoretical sources on the detector response matrix used in the unfolding. Due to this procedure, compared with the results in ref. [7], the H→γγ results presented in this article have these additional theoretical uncertainties in the detector response matrix. Uncertainties due to the PDF and missing higher-order corrections are estimated as described in – 4 – JHEP05(2023)028 Lepton and jet definitions Leptons Dressed leptons not originating from hadron or τdecays pT>5GeV, |η|<2.7 Jets pT>30 GeV, |y|<4.4 Lepton selection and pairing Lepton kinematics pTthreshold for three leading leptons: >20,15,10 GeV Leading pair (m12) SFOC lepton pair with smallest |mZ−m``| Subleading pair (m34) Remaining SFOC lepton pair with smallest |mZ−m``|as nominal Event selection Mass requirements 50 GeV< m12 <106 GeV and 12 GeV< m34 <115 GeV Lepton separation ∆R(`i, `j)>0.1 Lepton/Jet separation ∆R(`i,jet)>0.1 J/ψ veto m(`i, `j)>5GeV for all SFOC lepton pairs Mass window 105 GeV< m4`<160 GeV If extra lepton with pT>12 GeV Quadruplet with largest ggF matrix element value Table 1. Summary of the particle-level fiducial definitions in the H→ZZ∗→4`analysis [5]. A lepton quadruplet is formed by two same-flavour, opposite-charge (SFOC) lepton pairs. Dressed leptons are leptons whose four-momenta have been modified by adding the four-momenta of photons within a cone of size ∆R= 0.1around the lepton to account for final state radiation. The invariant mass of the SFOC lepton pair that is closest to mZis denoted with m12, while the invariant mass of the SFOC pair of remaining leptons that is closest to mZis denoted with m34. The quadruplet satisfying the lepton selection and pairing criteria is labelled as the nominal quadruplet. If the nominal quadruplet fails the event selection criteria, no quadruplet is marked as the Higgs boson candidate. If the nominal quadruplet passes the selection and there is an additional lepton, the quadruplet with the largest ggF matrix element value is taken as the Higgs boson candidate. If no extra lepton is found, then the nominal quadruplet is taken as the Higgs boson candidate. Photon and jet definitions Photons Photons not originating from hadron decays pT>15 GeV, |η|<1.37 or 1.52 <|η|<2.37 Eiso T(∆R < 0.2, pT>1GeV, charged) <0.05 ET Jets pT>30 GeV, |y|<4.4 Event selection Photon kinematics pTthreshold for two leading photons: pγ1 T>0.35mγγ ,pγ2 T>0.25mγγ Mass window 105 GeV < mγγ <160 GeV Table 2. Summary of the particle-level fiducial definitions in the H→γγ analysis [7]. Eiso T(∆R, pT,charged)is the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of charged stable particles with a transverse momentum above the specified threshold within a ∆Rcone centred on the photon direction. – 5 – JHEP05(2023)028 0 10 20 30 45 60 80 120 200 300 650 13000 [GeV] H T p 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Acceptance ATLAS Simulation -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs ZZ* → H γγ → H (a) =0 jets N =1 jets N =2 jets N 3≥ jets N jets N 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Acceptance ATLAS Simulation -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs ZZ* → H γγ → H (b) Figure 1. Acceptance factors (solid lines), including systematic uncertainties (hatched bands), for the extrapolation from the fiducial to the full phase space for the H→ZZ∗→4`decay channel (blue) and the H→γγ decay channel (magenta), as a function of variables characterising the Higgs boson kinematics: (a) Higgs boson transverse momentum pH Tand (b) number of jets Njets with pT>30 GeV. section 2. Uncertainties due to the parton shower model are evaluated by comparing the acceptance factors estimated using MC samples with the default Pythia8 showering with the acceptance factors computed using MC samples relying on the Herwig7 showering model. To account for the uncertainties in the SM Higgs boson production cross-sections when calculating the total acceptance factor from the sum of the various production modes, the fractions of production modes are independently varied within their measured uncertainties taken from ref. [46]. The total systematic uncertainties in the acceptance factors range between 0.5% and 7%, depending on the observable and bin, with the parton shower uncertainty being the dominant source. The inclusive acceptance factors, relative to the full phase space, are about 50% for both the H→ZZ∗→4`and the H→γγ channels. Figure 1shows the acceptance factors and their systematic uncertainties as a function of pH Tand Njets. In the H→ZZ∗→4` channel, the acceptance factor drops in the highest pH Tbin due to the lepton separation requirement, while the shape of the acceptance factor for the H→γγ channel as a function of pH Tis due to the pTselection criteria on the photons. 4 Statistical procedure A likelihood combination of the two decay channels is performed, following the method described in ref. [11]. For some observables, such as pH Tand plead.jet T, the binning in the H→γγ analysis is finer than that in the H→ZZ∗→4`analysis. Where needed, the sum of the consecutive H→γγ sub-bins is combined with one H→ZZ∗→4`bin – 6 – JHEP05(2023)028 Variable Bin Edges Nbins pH T0, 10, 20, 30, 45, 60, 80, 120, 200, 300, 650, 13000 GeV 11 |yH|0, 0.15, 0.3, 0.45, 0.6, 0.75, 0.9, 1.2, 1.6, 2.0, 2.5 10 Njets 0, 1, 2, ≥3 4 plead.jet T0, 30, 60, 120, 350 GeV 4 pH Tvs |yH|pH T: 0, 45, 120, 350 GeV; |yH|: 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.5 12 Table 3. Bin boundaries used in the combination of the cross-section of various differential observables. For the plead.jet Tdistribution, the first bin contains all events with a leading jet with pTless than 30 GeV, and corresponds exactly with the 0-jet bin in the Njets differential distribution. such that the measured bin boundaries match between the two results. A summary of the bin boundaries used in the combined results is presented in table 3. Higgs boson events that are outside of the fiducial region but are reconstructed within the signal region are accounted for in the likelihood function by a small correction (around 1–2%) of the signal normalisation, as described in refs. [5,7]. Experimental and theoretical uncertainties that affect both channels are correlated via common nuisance parameters. The correlated experimental uncertainties include the uncertainties in the integrated luminosity, in the description of the pile-up in the simulation, in the jet reconstruction and calibration, in the common electron-photon energy scale, in the Higgs boson mass value, and in the contributions of the different Higgs boson production modes. Additionally, the common sources of theoretical uncertainty in the H→ZZ∗→4` and H→γγ branching ratios (strong coupling constant, band cquark masses, and partial decay widths to the main decay channels, such as two vector bosons, two gluons, or a b¯ b pair) are also correlated. Finally, the theoretical uncertainties in the acceptance factor and response matrix due to missing higher-order QCD effects, PDF variations, variations of the modelling of the parton shower, and signal composition uncertainties are also correlated across the Higgs boson decay channels. The asymptotic approximation [47] for the distribution of the profile likelihood ratio is assumed in the computation of uncertainties on all reported measurements. The validity of this approximation has been verified in previous analyses by performing pseudoexperiments. 5 Results The total Higgs boson production cross-section at 13 TeV is measured to be 53.0+5.3 −5.1pb (+4.9 −4.8(stat.)+2.0 −1.7(syst.)) using the H→ZZ∗→4`decay channel and 58.1+5.7 −5.4pb (±4.2(stat.)+3.9 −3.5(syst.)) using the H→γγ decay channel. The total cross-section obtained combining the two results is 55.5+4.0 −3.8pb (±3.2(stat.)+2.4 −2.2(syst.)). All three results are in agreement with the SM prediction of 55.6±2.5pb. The measurements in the two decay channels are compatible with each other with a p-value of 49%, and the compatibility of the combined result with the SM prediction has a p-value of 98%. All compatibility – 7 – JHEP05(2023)028 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [TeV] s 0 20 40 60 80 100 [pb] H→pp σ ATLAS = 125.09 GeV) H m, H→pp( σSM QCD scale uncertainty ) s α PDF+⊕(scale Total uncertainty γγ →H*ZZ→H Combined data Systematic uncertainty -1 = 7 TeV, 4.5 fbs -1 = 8 TeV, 20.3 fbs -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs Figure 2. Total pp →H+Xcross-sections measured at centre-of-mass energies of 7, 8 and 13 TeV, compared with Standard Model predictions taken from ref. [35]. The measurements with the H→ZZ∗→4`channel (blue triangles), H→γγ channel (magenta inverted triangles) and their combination (black dots) are shown. The individual channel results are offset along the x-axis for display purposes. The black boxes around the combined measurements represent the systematic uncertainty, while the error bars show the total uncertainty. The light grey band shows the uncertainty in the prediction due to missing QCD higher-order corrections. The dark grey band indicates the total theoretical uncertainty, corresponding to the dominant QCD higher-ordercorrection uncertainty summed in quadrature with the sum of the PDF and αSuncertainties, and is partially correlated across values of the centre-of-mass energy. checks are performed using a likelihood ratio approach, based on the test statistic variation under different hypotheses in the asymptotic approximation. The total cross-section measured using the two channels, their combination, and the SM prediction for a Higgs boson mass of 125.09 GeV are shown in figure 2. The figure also includes the results of the measurements using data collected at a pp centre-of-mass energies of √s= 8 TeV and 7 TeV, and the corresponding theoretical expectations. The event samples, selections and the cross-section measurement techniques used for the 8 TeV measurements are described in refs. [48,49]; similar techniques are used to measure the cross-sections at 7TeV as described in refs. [50,51]. For both the 7 and 8 TeV results, the signal yields in the two decay channels are measured inclusively and corrected for acceptance and detector effects. The results at each centre-of-mass energy are then combined using a likelihood-based technique described in ref. [52]. The total Higgs boson production cross-section at 7TeV is measured to be 33+21 −16 pb using the H→ZZ∗→4`channel, 35+13 −16 pb using the H→γγ decay channel, and 34+11 −10 pb (±10(stat.)+4 −2(syst.)) from their combination. This is to be compared with the SM expectation of 19.2±0.9pb. At 8 TeV, the total Higgs boson production cross-section is measured to be 37+9 −8pb using the H→ZZ∗→4`channel, 30.5+7.5 −7.4pb using the H→γγ decay channel, and 33.3+5.8 −5.4pb – 8 – JHEP05(2023)028 1−0.5−0 0.5 1 b κ 6− 4− 2− 0 2 4 6 8 10 c κ ATLAS , γγ → H , ZZ* → H = 0 BSM B) c c(VH), bb(VH -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs 68% CL 95% CL Standard Model Obs. Combination (a) 1−0.5−0 0.5 1 b κ 6− 4− 2− 0 2 4 6 8 10 c κ ATLAS , γγ → H , ZZ* → H profiled BSM B) c c(VH), bb(VH -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs 68% CL 95% CL Standard Model Obs. Combination (b) Figure 6. Observed 2D negative log likelihood contours for the κband κcparameters from a simultaneous fit to the Higgs pTfiducial cross-sections in H→γγ and H→ZZ∗→4`and to multivariate discriminants used to identify V H events with Higgs bosons decaying to b¯ bor c¯c, for (a) BBSM = 0 or (b) leaving BBSM unconstrained. Higgs boson is also allowed to decay to BSM particles and the associated partial width is included in the total width. The partial width for BSM decays is parameterised as ΓBSM = Γ ×BBSM = ΓSM BBSM 1−BBSM , where Γis the Higgs boson total width, and BBSM is its branching ratio to BSM particles. The second scenario reduces the assumptions of the model, at the cost of reduced sensitivity. In the combination, most common experimental systematic uncertainties and signal theory uncertainties are modelled as correlated between the four channels (H→ZZ∗→ 4`,H→γγ,V H(b¯ b),V H(c¯c)). Jet energy calibration and flavour tagging efficiency uncertainties are not modelled as correlated between the channels due to the use of different jet clustering algorithms. The observed 68% and 95% CL contours in the 2D κbvs κcplane are shown in figure 6(a) for the shape+normalisation scenario where BBSM is fixed to zero and in figure 6(b) for the case where BBSM is a free parameter. The fit prefers a positive value of κb, but negative values are not excluded at 68% CL, leading to two disconnected allowed regions, corresponding to positive or negative values of κb. One-dimensional confidence intervals for κcwith κbunconstrained in the fit are summarised in table 8. Excluding the V H(c¯c)channel would worsen the one-dimensional constraints on κcby about 10% for the BBSM = 0 scenario, and by a factor two for the alternative scenario where BBSM is not fixed to zero. 7 Conclusions A combined measurement of the total and differential Higgs production cross-sections in the H→γγ and H→ZZ∗→4`decay channels was performed using 139 fb−1of 13 TeV proton–proton collision recorded by the ATLAS detector during the LHC Run 2. Good agreement is observed when comparing the results from the two channels, after – 15 – JHEP05(2023)028 Scenario Observed Observed 68% confidence interval 95% confidence interval BBSM = 0 [−1.61,1.70] [−2.47,2.53] No assumption on BBSM [−2.63,3.01] [−4.46,4.81] Table 8. One-dimensional confidence intervals in κc, while profiling κb, at 68% and 95% CL, obtained from a simultaneous fit to fiducial cross-sections in H→ZZ∗→4`and H→γγ in bins of the Higgs boson pTand to V H data with Higgs bosons decaying to b¯ bor c¯c. extrapolation to a common phase space. The total Higgs boson production cross-section is measured with an unprecedented precision of 7%, comparable to that of the best available Standard Model prediction which is 5%. The result, 55.5+4.0 −3.8pb, agrees with the SM predicted value of 55.6 ±2.5 pb. Differential cross-sections are measured as a function of the Higgs boson transverse momentum and rapidity, the number of jets produced together with the Higgs boson and the transverse momentum of the leading jet. The larger data set and the combination of the two decay channels result in measurement uncertainties that are significantly smaller than in previous results. Notably, the differential cross-section as a function of the Higgs boson transverse momentum is measured with 20–30% precision up to 300GeV and about 60% precision in the 300–650GeV range. The combined differential distributions agree with the Standard Model predictions. The measured fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of pH Tare used to derive limits on the bottom and charm-quark Yukawa couplings modifiers, κband κc, assuming SM values of the other tree-level Higgs boson couplings. Fixing the value of κbto one, the 95% confidence interval for κcis [−8.6,17.3] using only the observed shape of the pH T distribution, and [−2.27,2.27] when considering also the impact of these couplings on the normalisation of the measured pH Tfiducial cross-sections. A combined fit with the ATLAS measurement of Higgs bosons produced in association with a Wor Zboson and decaying to bor c-quark pairs allows constraints to be set on the charm quark coupling modifier without any assumption on the bottom quark coupling. The 95% CL allowed range for κcwhen the Higgs boson is assumed to decay only to SM particles is [−2.47,2.53] while in a more generic scenario in which BSM Higgs boson decays are allowed, the constraint is loosened to [−4.46,4.81]. These represent the most stringent constraints on κcto date in these scenarios. Acknowledgments We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; ANID, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; Minciencias, Colombia; MEYS CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3CNRS and CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, HGF and MPG, Ger- – 16 – JHEP05(2023)028 many; GSRI, Greece; RGC and Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MEiN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZŠ, Slovenia; DSI/NRF, South Africa; MICINN, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TENMAK, Türkiye; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, CANARIE, Compute Canada and CRC, Canada; PRIMUS 21/SCI/017 and UNCE SCI/013, Czech Republic; COST, ERC, ERDF, Horizon 2020 and Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d’Avenir Labex, Investissements d’Avenir Idex and ANR, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF, Greece; BSF-NSF and MINERVA, Israel; Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2014-2021, Norway; NCN and NAWA, Poland; La Caixa Banking Foundation, CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya and PROMETEO and GenT Programmes Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; Göran Gustafssons Stiftelse, Sweden; The Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN, the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA), the Tier-2 facilities worldwide and large non-WLCG resource providers. Major contributors of computing resources are listed in ref. [64]. – 17 – JHEP05(2023)028 A Correlation matrices between the measured cross-sections Figure 7and figure 8show the correlation matrices among the differential cross-sections measured in different bins of the same one-dimensional measurement. 1− 0.8− 0.6− 0.4− 0.2− 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 σ 1 σ 2 σ 3 σ 4 σ 5 σ 6 σ 7 σ 8 σ 9 σ 10 σ H T p 10 σ 9 σ 8 σ 7 σ 6 σ 5 σ 4 σ 3 σ 2 σ 1 σ 0 σ H T p 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 1.00 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06 0.04 1.00 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.06 1.00 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.06 1.00 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.01 1.00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 -0.06 1.00 0.02 0.03 0.02 -0.02 1.00 0.04 0.06 -0.06 1.00 0.04 -0.08 1.00 -0.09 1.00 1.00 ATLAS γγ → H*, ZZ → H -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs (a) 1− 0.8− 0.6− 0.4− 0.2− 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 σ 1 σ 2 σ 3 σ 4 σ 5 σ 6 σ 7 σ 8 σ 9 σ | H y| 9 σ 8 σ 7 σ 6 σ 5 σ 4 σ 3 σ 2 σ 1 σ 0 σ | H y| 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 1.00 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.06 1.00 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 1.00 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.02 1.00 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 -0.01 1.00 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.00 1.00 0.05 0.06 -0.00 1.00 0.04 -0.00 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 ATLAS γγ → H*, ZZ → H -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs (b) 1− 0.8− 0.6− 0.4− 0.2− 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 σ 1 σ 2 σ 3 σ 4 σ 5 σ 6 σ 7 σ 8 σ 9 σ 10 σ 11 σ | H y vs. | H T p 11 σ 10 σ 9 σ 8 σ 7 σ 6 σ 5 σ 4 σ 3 σ 2 σ 1 σ 0 σ | H y vs. | H T p 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.00 1.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 1.00 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 1.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.01 1.00 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.02 1.00 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.05 1.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.03 1.00 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.03 1.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 1.00 0.05 0.03 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 ATLAS γγ → H*, ZZ → H -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs (c) Figure 7. Correlation matrices between the differential pp →H+Xcross-sections measured in different bins of the same observable: (a) Higgs boson transverse momentum, (b) Higgs boson rapidity and (c) Higgs boson transverse momentum vs Higgs boson rapidity. The labels are defined as per the bin boundaries outlined in table 3, with a higher label index corresponding to a higher bin for the given variable. For the correlation matrix for the Higgs boson transverse momentum vs Higgs boson rapidity, lower rapidity bins are labelled first with ascending bins in pH T. – 18 – JHEP05(2023)028 1− 0.8− 0.6− 0.4− 0.2− 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 σ 1 σ 2 σ 3 σ jets N 3 σ 2 σ 1 σ 0 σ jets N -0.15 0.16 -0.17 1.00 -0.03 -0.25 1.00 -0.26 1.00 1.00 ATLAS γγ → H*, ZZ → H -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs (a) 1− 0.8− 0.6− 0.4− 0.2− 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 σ 1 σ 2 σ 3 σ lead. jet T p 3 σ 2 σ 1 σ 0 σ lead. jet T p 0.04 0.10 -0.04 1.00 0.05 -0.15 1.00 -0.39 1.00 1.00 ATLAS γγ → H*, ZZ → H -1 = 13 TeV, 139 fbs (b) Figure 8. Correlation matrices between the differential pp →H+Xcross-sections measured in different bins of the same observable: (a) number of jets and (b) pTof the leading jet. The labels are defined as per the bin boundaries outlined in table 3, with a higher label index corresponding to a higher bin for the given variable. Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. SCOAP3supports the goals of the International Year of Basic Sciences for Sustainable Development. References [1] ATLAS collaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC,Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1 [arXiv:1207.7214] [INSPIRE]. [2] CMS collaboration, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC,Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30 [arXiv:1207.7235] [INSPIRE]. [3] F. Englert and R. Brout, Broken Symmetry and the Mass of Gauge Vector Mesons,Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 321 [INSPIRE]. [4] P.W. Higgs, Broken symmetries, massless particles and gauge fields,Phys. Lett. 12 (1964) 132 [INSPIRE]. [5] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of the Higgs boson inclusive and differential fiducial cross sections in the 4`decay channel at √s= 13 TeV,Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 942 [arXiv:2004.03969] [INSPIRE]. [6] CMS collaboration, Measurements of production cross sections of the Higgs boson in the four-lepton final state in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV,Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 488 [arXiv:2103.04956] [INSPIRE]. – 19 – JHEP05(2023)028 [7] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of the Higgs boson inclusive and differential fiducial cross-sections in the diphoton decay channel with pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,JHEP 08 (2022) 027 [arXiv:2202.00487] [INSPIRE]. [8] CMS collaboration, Measurement of inclusive and differential Higgs boson production cross sections in the diphoton decay channel in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV,JHEP 01 (2019) 183 [arXiv:1807.03825] [INSPIRE]. [9] CMS collaboration, Measurement of the inclusive and differential Higgs boson production cross sections in the leptonic WW decay mode at √s= 13 TeV,JHEP 03 (2021) 003 [arXiv:2007.01984] [INSPIRE]. [10] CMS collaboration, Measurement of the Inclusive and Differential Higgs Boson Production Cross Sections in the Decay Mode to a Pair of τLeptons in pp Collisions at √s= 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022) 081805 [arXiv:2107.11486] [INSPIRE]. [11] ATLAS collaboration, Combined measurement of differential and total cross sections in the H→γγ and the H→ZZ∗→4`decay channels at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B 786 (2018) 114 [arXiv:1805.10197] [INSPIRE]. [12] CMS collaboration, Measurement and interpretation of differential cross sections for Higgs boson production at √s= 13 TeV,Phys. Lett. B 792 (2019) 369 [arXiv:1812.06504] [INSPIRE]. [13] ATLAS collaboration, Luminosity determination in pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC,ATLAS-CONF-2019-021, CERN, Geneva (2019). [14] G. Avoni et al., The new LUCID-2 detector for luminosity measurement and monitoring in ATLAS,2018 JINST 13 P07017 [INSPIRE]. [15] ATLAS collaboration, The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider,2008 JINST 3S08003 [INSPIRE]. [16] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of W H and ZH production in the H→b¯ bdecay channel in pp collisions at 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 178 [arXiv:2007.02873] [INSPIRE]. [17] ATLAS collaboration, Direct constraint on the Higgs-charm coupling from a search for Higgs boson decays into charm quarks with the ATLAS detector,Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022) 717 [arXiv:2201.11428] [INSPIRE]. [18] ATLAS collaboration, Jet reconstruction and performance using particle flow with the ATLAS Detector,Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 466 [arXiv:1703.10485] [INSPIRE]. [19] ATLAS and CMS collaborations, Combined Measurement of the Higgs Boson Mass in pp Collisions at √s= 7 and 8TeV with the ATLAS and CMS Experiments,Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 191803 [arXiv:1503.07589] [INSPIRE]. [20] P. Nason, A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP 11 (2004) 040 [hep-ph/0409146] [INSPIRE]. [21] S. Frixione, P. Nason and C. Oleari, Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method,JHEP 11 (2007) 070 [arXiv:0709.2092] [INSPIRE]. [22] 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 [arXiv:1002.2581] [INSPIRE]. – 20 – JHEP05(2023)028 [23] K. Hamilton, P. Nason, E. Re and G. Zanderighi, NNLOPS simulation of Higgs boson production,JHEP 10 (2013) 222 [arXiv:1309.0017] [INSPIRE]. [24] K. Hamilton, P. Nason and G. Zanderighi, Finite quark-mass effects in the NNLOPS POWHEG+MiNLO Higgs generator,JHEP 05 (2015) 140 [arXiv:1501.04637] [INSPIRE]. [25] K. Hamilton, P. Nason and G. Zanderighi, MINLO: multi-scale improved NLO,JHEP 10 (2012) 155 [arXiv:1206.3572] [INSPIRE]. [26] J.M. Campbell et al., NLO Higgs boson production plus one and two jets using the POWHEG BOX, MadGraph4 and MCFM,JHEP 07 (2012) 092 [arXiv:1202.5475] [INSPIRE]. [27] K. Hamilton, P. Nason, C. Oleari and G. Zanderighi, Merging H/W/Z + 0 and 1 jet at NLO with no merging scale: a path to parton shower + NNLO matching,JHEP 05 (2013) 082 [arXiv:1212.4504] [INSPIRE]. [28] S. Catani and M. Grazzini, Next-to-Next-to-Leading-Order Subtraction Formalism in Hadron Collisions and its Application to Higgs-boson Production at the Large Hadron Collider,Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 222002 [hep-ph/0703012] [INSPIRE]. [29] G. Bozzi, S. Catani, D. de Florian and M. Grazzini, Transverse-momentum resummation and the spectrum of the Higgs boson at the LHC,Nucl. Phys. B 737 (2006) 73 [hep-ph/0508068] [INSPIRE]. [30] D. de Florian, G. Ferrera, M. Grazzini and D. Tommasini, Transverse-momentum resummation: Higgs boson production at the Tevatron and the LHC,JHEP 11 (2011) 064 [arXiv:1109.2109] [INSPIRE]. [31] J. Butterworth et al., PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II,J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 023001 [arXiv:1510.03865] [INSPIRE]. [32] 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 [arXiv:1405.0301] [INSPIRE]. [33] M. Wiesemann et al., Higgs production in association with bottom quarks,JHEP 02 (2015) 132 [arXiv:1409.5301] [INSPIRE]. [34] NNPDF collaboration, Parton distributions for the LHC Run II,JHEP 04 (2015) 040 [arXiv:1410.8849] [INSPIRE]. [35] LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group collaboration, Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4. Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector,arXiv:1610.07922 [DOI:10.23731/CYRM-2017-002] [INSPIRE]. [36] T. Sjöstrand et al., An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2,Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159 [arXiv:1410.3012] [INSPIRE]. [37] ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of the Z/γ∗boson transverse momentum distribution in pp collisions at √s= 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector,JHEP 09 (2014) 145 [arXiv:1406.3660] [INSPIRE]. [38] ATLAS collaboration , ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes to 7TeV data,ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-021, CERN, Geneva (2014). [39] M. Bahr et al., Herwig++ Physics and Manual,Eur. Phys. J. C 58 (2008) 639 [arXiv:0803.0883] [INSPIRE]. – 21 – JHEP05(2023)028 [40] J. Bellm et al., Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0 release note,Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 196 [arXiv:1512.01178] [INSPIRE]. [41] R. Frederix and S. Frixione, Merging meets matching in MC@NLO,JHEP 12 (2012) 061 [arXiv:1209.6215] [INSPIRE]. [42] R. Frederix, S. Frixione, E. Vryonidou and M. Wiesemann, Heavy-quark mass effects in Higgs plus jets production,JHEP 08 (2016) 006 [arXiv:1604.03017] [INSPIRE]. [43] H. Mantler and M. Wiesemann, Hadronic Higgs production through NLO + PS in the SM, the 2HDM and the MSSM,Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 257 [arXiv:1504.06625] [INSPIRE]. [44] H. Mantler and M. Wiesemann, Topand bottom-mass effects in hadronic Higgs production at small transverse momenta through LO+NLL,Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2467 [arXiv:1210.8263] [INSPIRE]. [45] M. Cacciari, G.P. Salam and G. Soyez, The anti-ktjet clustering algorithm,JHEP 04 (2008) 063 [arXiv:0802.1189] [INSPIRE]. [46] ATLAS collaboration, Combined measurements of Higgs boson production and decay using up to 80 fb−1of proton-proton collision data at √s=13 TeV collected with the ATLAS experiment,Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 012002 [arXiv:1909.02845] [INSPIRE]. [47] G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross and O. Vitells, Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics,Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1554 [Erratum ibid. 73 (2013) 2501] [arXiv:1007.1727] [INSPIRE]. [48] ATLAS collaboration, Fiducial and differential cross sections of Higgs boson production measured in the four-lepton decay channel in pp collisions at √s= 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Phys. Lett. B 738 (2014) 234 [arXiv:1408.3226] [INSPIRE]. [49] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of fiducial and differential cross sections for Higgs boson production in the diphoton decay channel at √s= 8 TeV with ATLAS,JHEP 09 (2014) 112 [arXiv:1407.4222] [INSPIRE]. [50] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of Higgs boson production and couplings in the four-lepton channel in pp collisions at center-of-mass energies of 7and 8TeV with the ATLAS detector,Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 012006 [arXiv:1408.5191] [INSPIRE]. [51] ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of Higgs boson production in the diphoton decay channel in pp collisions at center-of-mass energies of 7and 8TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 112015 [arXiv:1408.7084] [INSPIRE]. [52] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of the Total and Differential Higgs Boson Production Cross Sections Combining the H→γγ and H→ZZ∗→4`Decay Channels at √s= 8 TeV with the ATLAS Detector,Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 091801 [arXiv:1504.05833] [INSPIRE]. [53] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of Higgs boson properties in the diphoton decay channel with 36 fb−1of pp collision data at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 052005 [arXiv:1802.04146] [INSPIRE]. [54] CMS collaboration, Observation of Higgs Boson Decay to Bottom Quarks,Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 121801 [arXiv:1808.08242] [INSPIRE]. [55] CMS collaboration, A search for the standard model Higgs boson decaying to charm quarks, JHEP 03 (2020) 131 [arXiv:1912.01662] [INSPIRE]. – 22 – JHEP05(2023)028 [56] ATLAS collaboration, A detailed map of Higgs boson interactions by the ATLAS experiment ten years after the discovery,Nature 607 (2022) 52 [Erratum ibid. 612 (2022) E24] [arXiv:2207.00092] [INSPIRE]. [57] CMS collaboration, A portrait of the Higgs boson by the CMS experiment ten years after the discovery,Nature 607 (2022) 60 [arXiv:2207.00043] [INSPIRE]. [58] CMS collaboration, Search for Higgs boson decay to a charm quark-antiquark pair in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV, submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett.,arXiv:2205.05550 [CERN-EP-2022-081]. [59] F. Bishara, U. Haisch, P.F. Monni and E. Re, Constraining Light-Quark Yukawa Couplings from Higgs Distributions,Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 121801 [arXiv:1606.09253] [INSPIRE]. [60] M.A. Ebert et al., SCETlib: a C++ package for numerical calculations in QCD and soft-collinear effective theory, DESY-17-099 (2018). [61] G. Billis et al., Higgs pTSpectrum and Total Cross Section with Fiducial Cuts at Third Resummed and Fixed Order in QCD,Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 072001 [arXiv:2102.08039] [INSPIRE]. [62] M. Bonvini, A.S. Papanastasiou and F.J. Tackmann, Matched predictions for the bbH cross section at the 13 TeV LHC,JHEP 10 (2016) 053 [arXiv:1605.01733] [INSPIRE]. [63] R.V. Harlander, Higgs production in heavy quark annihilation through next-to-next-to-leading order QCD,Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 252 [arXiv:1512.04901] [INSPIRE]. [64] ATLAS collaboration, ATLAS Computing Acknowledgements,ATL-SOFT-PUB-2021-003, CERN, Geneva (2021). – 23 – JHEP05(2023)028 The ATLAS collaboration G. Aad 101, B. Abbott 119, D.C. Abbott 102, K. Abeling 55, S.H. Abidi 29, A. Aboulhorma 35e, H. Abramowicz 150, H. Abreu 149, Y. Abulaiti 116, A.C. Abusleme Hoffman 136a, B.S. Acharya 68a,68b,p, B. Achkar 55, C. Adam Bourdarios 4, L. Adamczyk 84a, L. Adamek 154, S.V. Addepalli 26, J. Adelman 114, A. Adiguzel 21c, S. Adorni 56, T. Adye 133, A.A. Affolder 135, Y. Afik 36, M.N. Agaras 13, J. Agarwala 72a,72b, A. Aggarwal 99, C. Agheorghiesei 27c, J.A. Aguilar-Saavedra 129f, A. Ahmad 36, F. Ahmadov 38,y, W.S. Ahmed 103, S. Ahuja 94, X. Ai 48, G. Aielli 75a,75b, I. Aizenberg 167, M. Akbiyik 99, T.P.A. Åkesson 97, A.V. Akimov 37, K. Al Khoury 41, G.L. Alberghi 23b, J. Albert 163, P. Albicocco 53, S. Alderweireldt 52, M. Aleksa 36, I.N. Aleksandrov 38, C. Alexa 27b, T. Alexopoulos 10, A. Alfonsi 113, F. Alfonsi 23b, M. Alhroob 119, B. Ali 131, S. Ali 147, M. Aliev 37, G. Alimonti 70a, W. Alkakhi 55, C. Allaire 66, B.M.M. Allbrooke 145, P.P. Allport 20, A. Aloisio 71a,71b, F. Alonso 89, C. Alpigiani 137, E. Alunno Camelia75a,75b, M. Alvarez Estevez 98, M.G. Alviggi 71a,71b, M. Aly 100, Y. Amaral Coutinho 81b, A. Ambler 103, C. Amelung36, M. Amerl 1, C.G. Ames 108, D. Amidei 105, S.P. Amor Dos Santos 129a, S. Amoroso 48, K.R. Amos 161, V. Ananiev 124, C. Anastopoulos 138, T. Andeen 11, J.K. Anders 36, S.Y. Andrean 47a,47b, A. Andreazza 70a,70b, S. Angelidakis 9, A. Angerami 41,aa, A.V. Anisenkov 37, A. Annovi 73a, C. Antel 56, M.T. Anthony 138, E. Antipov 120, M. Antonelli 53, D.J.A. Antrim 17a, F. Anulli 74a, M. Aoki 82, T. Aoki 152, J.A. Aparisi Pozo 161, M.A. Aparo 145, L. Aperio Bella 48, C. Appelt 18, N. Aranzabal 36, V. Araujo Ferraz 81a, C. Arcangeletti 53, A.T.H. Arce 51, E. Arena 91, J-F. Arguin 107, S. Argyropoulos 54, J.-H. Arling 48, A.J. Armbruster 36, O. Arnaez 154, H. Arnold 113, Z.P. Arrubarrena Tame108, G. Artoni 74a,74b, H. Asada 110, K. Asai 117, S. Asai 152, N.A. Asbah 61, J. Assahsah 35d, K. Assamagan 29, R. Astalos 28a, R.J. Atkin 33a, M. Atkinson160, N.B. Atlay 18, H. Atmani62b, P.A. Atmasiddha 105, K. Augsten 131, S. Auricchio 71a,71b, A.D. Auriol 20, V.A. Austrup 169, G. Avner 149, G. Avolio 36, K. Axiotis 56, M.K. Ayoub 14c, G. Azuelos 107,ad, D. Babal 28a, H. Bachacou 134, K. Bachas 151,r, A. Bachiu 34, F. Backman 47a,47b, A. Badea 61, P. Bagnaia 74a,74b, M. Bahmani 18, A.J. Bailey 161, V.R. Bailey 160, J.T. Baines 133, C. Bakalis 10, O.K. Baker 170, P.J. Bakker 113, E. Bakos 15, D. Bakshi Gupta 8, S. Balaji 146, R. Balasubramanian 113, E.M. Baldin 37, P. Balek 132, E. Ballabene 70a,70b, F. Balli 134, L.M. Baltes 63a, W.K. Balunas 32, J. Balz 99, E. Banas 85, M. Bandieramonte 128, A. Bandyopadhyay 24, S. Bansal 24, L. Barak 150, E.L. Barberio 104, D. Barberis 57b,57a, M. Barbero 101, G. Barbour95, K.N. Barends 33a, T. Barillari 109, M-S. Barisits 36, T. Barklow 142, R.M. Barnett 17a, P. Baron 121, D.A. Baron Moreno 100, A. Baroncelli 62a, G. Barone 29, A.J. Barr 125, L. Barranco Navarro 47a,47b, F. Barreiro 98, J. Barreiro Guimarães da Costa 14a, U. Barron 150, M.G. Barros Teixeira 129a, S. Barsov 37, F. Bartels 63a, R. Bartoldus 142, A.E. Barton 90, P. Bartos 28a, A. Basalaev 48, A. Basan 99, M. Baselga 49, I. Bashta 76a,76b, A. Bassalat 66, M.J. Basso 154, C.R. Basson 100, R.L. Bates 59, S. Batlamous35e, J.R. Batley 32, B. Batool 140, M. Battaglia 135, D. Battulga 18, M. Bauce 74a,74b, P. Bauer 24, A. Bayirli 21a, J.B. Beacham 51, T. Beau 126, P.H. Beauchemin 157, F. Becherer 54, P. Bechtle 24, H.P. Beck 19,q, K. Becker 165, A.J. Beddall 21d, V.A. Bednyakov 38, C.P. Bee 144, L.J. Beemster15, T.A. Beermann 36, M. Begalli 81d,81d, M. Begel 29, A. Behera 144, J.K. Behr 48, C. Beirao Da Cruz E Silva 36, J.F. Beirer 55,36, F. Beisiegel 24, M. Belfkir 115b, G. Bella 150, L. Bellagamba 23b, A. Bellerive 34, P. Bellos 20, – 24 – JHEP05(2023)028 J.A. Mcfayden 145, G. Mchedlidze 148b, R.P. Mckenzie 33g, T.C. Mclachlan 48, D.J. Mclaughlin 95, K.D. McLean 163, S.J. McMahon 133, P.C. McNamara 104, C.M. Mcpartland 91, R.A. McPherson 163,w, T. Megy 40, S. Mehlhase 108, A. Mehta 91, B. Meirose 45, D. Melini 149, B.R. Mellado Garcia 33g, A.H. Melo 55, F. Meloni 48, E.D. Mendes Gouveia 129a, A.M. Mendes Jacques Da Costa 20, H.Y. Meng 154, L. Meng 90, S. Menke 109, M. Mentink 36, E. Meoni 43b,43a, C. Merlassino 125, L. Merola 71a,71b, C. Meroni 70a, G. Merz105, O. Meshkov 37, J.K.R. Meshreki 140, J. Metcalfe 6, A.S. Mete 6, C. Meyer 67, J-P. Meyer 134, M. Michetti 18, R.P. Middleton 133, L. Mijović 52, G. Mikenberg 167, M. Mikestikova 130, M. Mikuž 92, H. Mildner 138, A. Milic 36, C.D. Milke 44, D.W. Miller 39, L.S. Miller 34, A. Milov 167, D.A. Milstead47a,47b, T. Min14c, A.A. Minaenko 37, I.A. Minashvili 148b, L. Mince 59, A.I. Mincer 116, B. Mindur 84a, M. Mineev 38, Y. Mino 86, L.M. Mir 13, M. Miralles Lopez 161, M. Mironova 125, M.C. Missio 112, T. Mitani 166, A. Mitra 165, V.A. Mitsou 161, O. Miu 154, P.S. Miyagawa 93, Y. Miyazaki88, A. Mizukami 82, J.U. Mjörnmark 97, T. Mkrtchyan 63a, T. Mlinarevic 95, M. Mlynarikova 36, T. Moa 47a,47b, S. Mobius 55, K. Mochizuki 107, P. Moder 48, P. Mogg 108, A.F. Mohammed 14a,14d, S. Mohapatra 41, G. Mokgatitswane 33g, B. Mondal 140, S. Mondal 131, K. Mönig 48, E. Monnier 101, L. Monsonis Romero161, J. Montejo Berlingen 36, M. Montella 118, F. Monticelli 89, N. Morange 66, A.L. Moreira De Carvalho 129a, M. Moreno Llácer 161, C. Moreno Martinez 56, P. Morettini 57b, S. Morgenstern 165, M. Morii 61, M. Morinaga 152, A.K. Morley 36, F. Morodei 74a,74b, L. Morvaj 36, P. Moschovakos 36, B. Moser 36, M. Mosidze148b, T. Moskalets 54, P. Moskvitina 112, J. Moss 31,o, E.J.W. Moyse 102, O. Mtintsilana 33g, S. Muanza 101, J. Mueller 128, D. Muenstermann 90, R. Müller 19, G.A. Mullier 159, J.J. Mullin127, D.P. Mungo 154, J.L. Munoz Martinez 13, D. Munoz Perez 161, F.J. Munoz Sanchez 100, M. Murin 100, W.J. Murray 165,133, A. Murrone 70a,70b, J.M. Muse 119, M. Muškinja 17a, C. Mwewa 29, A.G. Myagkov 37,a, A.J. Myers 8, A.A. Myers128, G. Myers 67, M. Myska 131, B.P. Nachman 17a, O. Nackenhorst 49, A. Nag 50, K. Nagai 125, K. Nagano 82, J.L. Nagle 29,ag, E. Nagy 101, A.M. Nairz 36, Y. Nakahama 82, K. Nakamura 82, H. Nanjo 123, R. Narayan 44, E.A. Narayanan 111, I. Naryshkin 37, M. Naseri 34, C. Nass 24, G. Navarro 22a, J. Navarro-Gonzalez 161, R. Nayak 150, A. Nayaz 18, P.Y. Nechaeva 37, F. Nechansky 48, L. Nedic 125, T.J. Neep 20, A. Negri 72a,72b, M. Negrini 23b, C. Nellist 112, C. Nelson 103, K. Nelson 105, S. Nemecek 130, M. Nessi 36,h, M.S. Neubauer 160, F. Neuhaus 99, J. Neundorf 48, R. Newhouse 162, P.R. Newman 20, C.W. Ng 128, Y.S. Ng18, Y.W.Y. Ng 48, B. Ngair 35e, H.D.N. Nguyen 107, R.B. Nickerson 125, R. Nicolaidou 134, J. Nielsen 135, M. Niemeyer 55, N. Nikiforou 36, V. Nikolaenko 37,a, I. Nikolic-Audit 126, K. Nikolopoulos 20, P. Nilsson 29, H.R. Nindhito 56, A. Nisati 74a, N. Nishu 2, R. Nisius 109, J-E. Nitschke 50, E.K. Nkadimeng 33g, S.J. Noacco Rosende 89, T. Nobe 152, D.L. Noel 32, Y. Noguchi 86, T. Nommensen 146, M.A. Nomura29, M.B. Norfolk 138, R.R.B. Norisam 95, B.J. Norman 34, J. Novak 92, T. Novak 48, O. Novgorodova 50, L. Novotny 131, R. Novotny 111, L. Nozka 121, K. Ntekas 158, N.M.J. Nunes De Moura Junior 81b, E. Nurse95, F.G. Oakham 34,ad, J. Ocariz 126, A. Ochi 83, I. Ochoa 129a, S. Oerdek 159, A. Ogrodnik 84a, A. Oh 100, C.C. Ohm 143, H. Oide 82, R. Oishi 152, M.L. Ojeda 48, Y. Okazaki 86, M.W. O’Keefe91, Y. Okumura 152, A. Olariu27b, L.F. Oleiro Seabra 129a, S.A. Olivares Pino 136e, D. Oliveira Damazio 29, D. Oliveira Goncalves 81a, J.L. Oliver 158, M.J.R. Olsson 158, A. Olszewski 85, J. Olszowska 85,*, Ö.O. Öncel 54, D.C. O’Neil 141, A.P. O’Neill 19, A. Onofre 129a,129e, – 31 – JHEP05(2023)028 P.U.E. Onyisi 11, M.J. Oreglia 39, G.E. Orellana 89, D. Orestano 76a,76b, N. Orlando 13, R.S. Orr 154, V. O’Shea 59, R. Ospanov 62a, G. Otero y Garzon 30, H. Otono 88, P.S. Ott 63a, G.J. Ottino 17a, M. Ouchrif 35d, J. Ouellette 29,ag, F. Ould-Saada 124, M. Owen 59, R.E. Owen 133, K.Y. Oyulmaz 21a, V.E. Ozcan 21a, N. Ozturk 8, S. Ozturk 21d, J. Pacalt 121, H.A. Pacey 32, K. Pachal 51, A. Pacheco Pages 13, C. Padilla Aranda 13, G. Padovano 74a,74b, S. Pagan Griso 17a, G. Palacino 67, A. Palazzo 69a,69b, S. Palestini 36, M. Palka 84b, J. Pan 170, T. Pan 64a, D.K. Panchal 11, C.E. Pandini 113, J.G. Panduro Vazquez 94, H. Pang 14b, P. Pani 48, G. Panizzo 68a,68c, L. Paolozzi 56, C. Papadatos 107, S. Parajuli 44, A. Paramonov 6, C. Paraskevopoulos 10, D. Paredes Hernandez 64b, T.H. Park 154, M.A. Parker 32, F. Parodi 57b,57a, E.W. Parrish 114, V.A. Parrish 52, J.A. Parsons 41, U. Parzefall 54, B. Pascual Dias 107, L. Pascual Dominguez 150, V.R. Pascuzzi 17a, F. Pasquali 113, E. Pasqualucci 74a, S. Passaggio 57b, F. Pastore 94, P. Pasuwan 47a,47b, P. Patel 85, J.R. Pater 100, T. Pauly 36, J. Pearkes 142, M. Pedersen 124, R. Pedro 129a, S.V. Peleganchuk 37, O. Penc 36, E.A. Pender52, C. Peng 64b, H. Peng 62a, K.E. Penski 108, M. Penzin 37, B.S. Peralva 81d,81d, A.P. Pereira Peixoto 60, L. Pereira Sanchez 47a,47b, D.V. Perepelitsa 29,ag, E. Perez Codina 155a, M. Perganti 10, L. Perini 70a,70b,*, H. Pernegger 36, S. Perrella 36, A. Perrevoort 112, O. Perrin 40, K. Peters 48, R.F.Y. Peters 100, B.A. Petersen 36, T.C. Petersen 42, E. Petit 101, V. Petousis 131, C. Petridou 151,e, A. Petrukhin 140, M. Pettee 17a, N.E. Pettersson 36, A. Petukhov 37, K. Petukhova 132, A. Peyaud 134, R. Pezoa 136f, L. Pezzotti 36, G. Pezzullo 170, T.M. Pham 168, T. Pham 104, P.W. Phillips 133, M.W. Phipps 160, G. Piacquadio 144, E. Pianori 17a, F. Piazza 70a,70b, R. Piegaia 30, D. Pietreanu 27b, A.D. Pilkington 100, M. Pinamonti 68a,68c, J.L. Pinfold 2, B.C. Pinheiro Pereira 129a, C. Pitman Donaldson95, D.A. Pizzi 34, L. Pizzimento 75a,75b, A. Pizzini 113, M.-A. Pleier 29, V. Plesanovs54, V. Pleskot 132, E. Plotnikova38, G. Poddar 4, R. Poettgen 97, L. Poggioli 126, I. Pogrebnyak 106, D. Pohl 24, I. Pokharel 55, S. Polacek 132, G. Polesello 72a, A. Poley 141,155a, R. Polifka 131, A. Polini 23b, C.S. Pollard 125, Z.B. Pollock 118, V. Polychronakos 29, E. Pompa Pacchi74a,74b, D. Ponomarenko 37, L. Pontecorvo 36, S. Popa 27a, G.A. Popeneciu 27d, D.M. Portillo Quintero 155a, S. Pospisil 131, P. Postolache 27c, K. Potamianos 125, I.N. Potrap 38, C.J. Potter 32, H. Potti 1, T. Poulsen 48, J. Poveda 161, M.E. Pozo Astigarraga 36, A. Prades Ibanez 161, M.M. Prapa 46, D. Price 100, M. Primavera 69a, M.A. Principe Martin 98, R. Privara 121, M.L. Proffitt 137, N. Proklova 127, K. Prokofiev 64c, G. Proto 75a,75b, S. Protopopescu 29, J. Proudfoot 6, M. Przybycien 84a, J.E. Puddefoot 138, D. Pudzha 37, P. Puzo66, D. Pyatiizbyantseva 37, J. Qian 105, D. Qichen 100, Y. Qin 100, T. Qiu 93, A. Quadt 55, M. Queitsch-Maitland 100, G. Quetant 56, G. Rabanal Bolanos 61, D. Rafanoharana 54, F. Ragusa 70a,70b, J.L. Rainbolt 39, J.A. Raine 56, S. Rajagopalan 29, E. Ramakoti 37, K. Ran 48,14d, N.P. Rapheeha 33g, V. Raskina 126, D.F. Rassloff 63a, S. Rave 99, B. Ravina 55, I. Ravinovich 167, M. Raymond 36, A.L. Read 124, N.P. Readioff 138, D.M. Rebuzzi 72a,72b, G. Redlinger 29, K. Reeves 45, J.A. Reidelsturz 169, D. Reikher 150, A. Reiss99, A. Rej 140, C. Rembser 36, A. Renardi 48, M. Renda 27b, M.B. Rendel109, F. Renner 48, A.G. Rennie 59, S. Resconi 70a, M. Ressegotti 57b,57a, E.D. Resseguie 17a, S. Rettie 36, J.G. Reyes Rivera 106, B. Reynolds118, E. Reynolds 17a, M. Rezaei Estabragh 169, O.L. Rezanova 37, P. Reznicek 132, E. Ricci 77a,77b, R. Richter 109, S. Richter 47a,47b, E. Richter-Was 84b, M. Ridel 126, P. Rieck 116, P. Riedler 36, M. Rijssenbeek 144, A. Rimoldi 72a,72b, M. Rimoldi 48, L. Rinaldi 23b,23a, T.T. Rinn 29, M.P. Rinnagel 108, G. Ripellino 143, I. Riu 13, P. Rivadeneira 48, – 32 – JHEP05(2023)028 J.C. Rivera Vergara 163, F. Rizatdinova 120, E. Rizvi 93, C. Rizzi 56, B.A. Roberts 165, B.R. Roberts 17a, S.H. Robertson 103,w, M. Robin 48, D. Robinson 32, C.M. Robles Gajardo136f, M. Robles Manzano 99, A. Robson 59, A. Rocchi 75a,75b, C. Roda 73a,73b, S. Rodriguez Bosca 63a, Y. Rodriguez Garcia 22a, A. Rodriguez Rodriguez 54, A.M. Rodríguez Vera 155b, S. Roe36, J.T. Roemer 158, A.R. Roepe-Gier 119, J. Roggel 169, O. Røhne 124, R.A. Rojas 163, B. Roland 54, C.P.A. Roland 67, J. Roloff 29, A. Romaniouk 37, E. Romano 72a,72b, M. Romano 23b, A.C. Romero Hernandez 160, N. Rompotis 91, L. Roos 126, S. Rosati 74a, B.J. Rosser 39, E. Rossi 4, E. Rossi 71a,71b, L.P. Rossi 57b, L. Rossini 48, R. Rosten 118, M. Rotaru 27b, B. Rottler 54, D. Rousseau 66, D. Rousso 32, G. Rovelli 72a,72b, A. Roy 160, A. Rozanov 101, Y. Rozen 149, X. Ruan 33g, A. Rubio Jimenez 161, A.J. Ruby 91, V.H. Ruelas Rivera 18, T.A. Ruggeri 1, F. Rühr 54, A. Ruiz-Martinez 161, A. Rummler 36, Z. Rurikova 54, N.A. Rusakovich 38, H.L. Russell 163, J.P. Rutherfoord 7, K. Rybacki90, M. Rybar 132, E.B. Rye 124, A. Ryzhov 37, J.A. Sabater Iglesias 56, P. Sabatini 161, L. Sabetta 74a,74b, H.F-W. Sadrozinski 135, F. Safai Tehrani 74a, B. Safarzadeh Samani 145, M. Safdari 142, S. Saha 103, M. Sahinsoy 109, M. Saimpert 134, M. Saito 152, T. Saito 152, D. Salamani 36, G. Salamanna 76a,76b, A. Salnikov 142, J. Salt 161, A. Salvador Salas 13, D. Salvatore 43b,43a, F. Salvatore 145, A. Salzburger 36, D. Sammel 54, D. Sampsonidis 151,e, D. Sampsonidou 62d,62c, J. Sánchez 161, A. Sanchez Pineda 4, V. Sanchez Sebastian 161, H. Sandaker 124, C.O. Sander 48, J.A. Sandesara 102, M. Sandhoff 169, C. Sandoval 22b, D.P.C. Sankey 133, A. Sansoni 53, L. Santi 74a,74b, C. Santoni 40, H. Santos 129a,129b, S.N. Santpur 17a, A. Santra 167, K.A. Saoucha 138, J.G. Saraiva 129a,129d, J. Sardain 7, O. Sasaki 82, K. Sato 156, C. Sauer63b, F. Sauerburger 54, E. Sauvan 4, P. Savard 154,ad, R. Sawada 152, C. Sawyer 133, L. Sawyer 96, I. Sayago Galvan161, C. Sbarra 23b, A. Sbrizzi 23b,23a, T. Scanlon 95, J. Schaarschmidt 137, P. Schacht 109, D. Schaefer 39, U. Schäfer 99, A.C. Schaffer 66, D. Schaile 108, R.D. Schamberger 144, E. Schanet 108, C. Scharf 18, M.M. Schefer 19, V.A. Schegelsky 37, D. Scheirich 132, F. Schenck 18, M. Schernau 158, C. Scheulen 55, C. Schiavi 57b,57a, Z.M. Schillaci 26, E.J. Schioppa 69a,69b, M. Schioppa 43b,43a, B. Schlag 99, K.E. Schleicher 54, S. Schlenker 36, J. Schmeing 169, M.A. Schmidt 169, K. Schmieden 99, C. Schmitt 99, S. Schmitt 48, L. Schoeffel 134, A. Schoening 63b, P.G. Scholer 54, E. Schopf 125, M. Schott 99, J. Schovancova 36, S. Schramm 56, F. Schroeder 169, H-C. Schultz-Coulon 63a, M. Schumacher 54, B.A. Schumm 135, Ph. Schune 134, A. Schwartzman 142, T.A. Schwarz 105, Ph. Schwemling 134, R. Schwienhorst 106, A. Sciandra 135, G. Sciolla 26, F. Scuri 73a, F. Scutti104, C.D. Sebastiani 91, K. Sedlaczek 49, P. Seema 18, S.C. Seidel 111, A. Seiden 135, B.D. Seidlitz 41, T. Seiss 39, C. Seitz 48, J.M. Seixas 81b, G. Sekhniaidze 71a, S.J. Sekula 44, L. Selem 4, N. Semprini-Cesari 23b,23a, S. Sen 51, D. Sengupta 56, V. Senthilkumar 161, L. Serin 66, L. Serkin 68a,68b, M. Sessa 76a,76b, H. Severini 119, S. Sevova 142, F. Sforza 57b,57a, A. Sfyrla 56, E. Shabalina 55, R. Shaheen 143, J.D. Shahinian 127, D. Shaked Renous 167, L.Y. Shan 14a, M. Shapiro 17a, A. Sharma 36, A.S. Sharma 162, P. Sharma 79, S. Sharma 48, P.B. Shatalov 37, K. Shaw 145, S.M. Shaw 100, Q. Shen 62c,5, P. Sherwood 95, L. Shi 95, C.O. Shimmin 170, Y. Shimogama 166, J.D. Shinner 94, I.P.J. Shipsey 125, S. Shirabe 60, M. Shiyakova 38, J. Shlomi 167, M.J. Shochet 39, J. Shojaii 104, D.R. Shope 124, S. Shrestha 118,ah, E.M. Shrif 33g, M.J. Shroff 163, P. Sicho 130, A.M. Sickles 160, E. Sideras Haddad 33g, A. Sidoti 23b, F. Siegert 50, Dj. Sijacki 15, R. Sikora 84a, F. Sili 89, J.M. Silva 20, M.V. Silva Oliveira 36, S.B. Silverstein 47a, S. Simion66, R. Simoniello 36, E.L. Simpson 59, – 33 – JHEP05(2023)028 N.D. Simpson97, S. Simsek 21d, S. Sindhu 55, P. Sinervo 154, V. Sinetckii 37, S. Singh 141, S. Singh 154, S. Sinha 48, S. Sinha 33g, M. Sioli 23b,23a, I. Siral 36, S.Yu. Sivoklokov 37,*, J. Sjölin 47a,47b, A. Skaf 55, E. Skorda 97, P. Skubic 119, M. Slawinska 85, V. Smakhtin167, B.H. Smart 133, J. Smiesko 36, S.Yu. Smirnov 37, Y. Smirnov 37, L.N. Smirnova 37,a, O. Smirnova 97, A.C. Smith 41, E.A. Smith 39, H.A. Smith 125, J.L. Smith 91, R. Smith142, M. Smizanska 90, K. Smolek 131, A. Smykiewicz 85, A.A. Snesarev 37, H.L. Snoek 113, S. Snyder 29, R. Sobie 163,w, A. Soffer 150, C.A. Solans Sanchez 36, E.Yu. Soldatov 37, U. Soldevila 161, A.A. Solodkov 37, S. Solomon 54, A. Soloshenko 38, K. Solovieva 54, O.V. Solovyanov 37, V. Solovyev 37, P. Sommer 36, A. Sonay 13, W.Y. Song 155b, A. Sopczak 131, A.L. Sopio 95, F. Sopkova 28b, V. Sothilingam63a, S. Sottocornola 72a,72b, R. Soualah 115c, Z. Soumaimi 35e, D. South 48, S. Spagnolo 69a,69b, M. Spalla 109, F. Spanò 94, D. Sperlich 54, G. Spigo 36, M. Spina 145, S. Spinali 90, D.P. Spiteri 59, M. Spousta 132, E.J. Staats 34, A. Stabile 70a,70b, R. Stamen 63a, M. Stamenkovic 113, A. Stampekis 20, M. Standke 24, E. Stanecka 85, M.V. Stange 50, B. Stanislaus 17a, M.M. Stanitzki 48, M. Stankaityte 125, B. Stapf 48, E.A. Starchenko 37, G.H. Stark 135, J. Stark 101, D.M. Starko155b, P. Staroba 130, P. Starovoitov 63a, S. Stärz 103, R. Staszewski 85, G. Stavropoulos 46, J. Steentoft 159, P. Steinberg 29, A.L. Steinhebel 122, B. Stelzer 141,155a, H.J. Stelzer 128, O. Stelzer-Chilton 155a, H. Stenzel 58, T.J. Stevenson 145, G.A. Stewart 36, M.C. Stockton 36, G. Stoicea 27b, M. Stolarski 129a, S. Stonjek 109, A. Straessner 50, J. Strandberg 143, S. Strandberg 47a,47b, M. Strauss 119, T. Strebler 101, P. Strizenec 28b, R. Ströhmer 164, D.M. Strom 122, L.R. Strom 48, R. Stroynowski 44, A. Strubig 47a,47b, S.A. Stucci 29, B. Stugu 16, J. Stupak 119, N.A. Styles 48, D. Su 142, S. Su 62a, W. Su 62d,137,62c, X. Su 62a,66, K. Sugizaki 152, V.V. Sulin 37, M.J. Sullivan 91, D.M.S. Sultan 77a,77b, L. Sultanaliyeva 37, S. Sultansoy 3b, T. Sumida 86, S. Sun 105, S. Sun 168, O. Sunneborn Gudnadottir 159, M.R. Sutton 145, M. Svatos 130, M. Swiatlowski 155a, T. Swirski 164, I. Sykora 28a, M. Sykora 132, T. Sykora 132, D. Ta 99, K. Tackmann 48,v, A. Taffard 158, R. Tafirout 155a, J.S. Tafoya Vargas 66, R.H.M. Taibah 126, R. Takashima 87, K. Takeda 83, E.P. Takeva 52, Y. Takubo 82, M. Talby 101, A.A. Talyshev 37, K.C. Tam 64b, N.M. Tamir150, A. Tanaka 152, J. Tanaka 152, R. Tanaka 66, M. Tanasini 57b,57a, J. Tang62c, Z. Tao 162, S. Tapia Araya 80, S. Tapprogge 99, A. Tarek Abouelfadl Mohamed 106, S. Tarem 149, K. Tariq 62b, G. Tarna 101,27b, G.F. Tartarelli 70a, P. Tas 132, M. Tasevsky 130, E. Tassi 43b,43a, A.C. Tate 160, G. Tateno 152, Y. Tayalati 35e, G.N. Taylor 104, W. Taylor 155b, H. Teagle91, A.S. Tee 168, R. Teixeira De Lima 142, P. Teixeira-Dias 94, J.J. Teoh 154, K. Terashi 152, J. Terron 98, S. Terzo 13, M. Testa 53, R.J. Teuscher 154,w, A. Thaler 78, O. Theiner 56, N. Themistokleous 52, T. Theveneaux-Pelzer 18, O. Thielmann 169, D.W. Thomas94, J.P. Thomas 20, E.A. Thompson 48, P.D. Thompson 20, E. Thomson 127, E.J. Thorpe 93, Y. Tian 55, V. Tikhomirov 37,a, Yu.A. Tikhonov 37, S. Timoshenko37, E.X.L. Ting 1, P. Tipton 170, S. Tisserant 101, S.H. Tlou 33g, A. Tnourji 40, K. Todome 23b,23a, S. Todorova-Nova 132, S. Todt50, M. Togawa 82, J. Tojo 88, S. Tokár 28a, K. Tokushuku 82, R. Tombs 32, M. Tomoto 82,110, L. Tompkins 142, K.W. Topolnicki 84b, P. Tornambe 102, E. Torrence 122, H. Torres 50, E. Torró Pastor 161, M. Toscani 30, C. Tosciri 39, M. Tost 11, D.R. Tovey 138, A. Traeet16, I.S. Trandafir 27b, T. Trefzger 164, A. Tricoli 29, I.M. Trigger 155a, S. Trincaz-Duvoid 126, D.A. Trischuk 26, B. Trocmé 60, A. Trofymov 66, C. Troncon 70a, L. Truong 33c, M. Trzebinski 85, A. Trzupek 85, F. Tsai 144, M. Tsai 105, A. Tsiamis 151,e, P.V. Tsiareshka37, S. Tsigaridas 155a, A. Tsirigotis 151,t, V. Tsiskaridze 144, E.G. Tskhadadze148a, M. Tsopoulou 151,e, Y. Tsujikawa 86, I.I. Tsukerman 37, – 34 – JHEP05(2023)028 V. Tsulaia 17a, S. Tsuno 82, O. Tsur149, D. Tsybychev 144, Y. Tu 64b, A. Tudorache 27b, V. Tudorache 27b, A.N. Tuna 36, S. Turchikhin 38, I. Turk Cakir 3a, R. Turra 70a, T. Turtuvshin 38,x, P.M. Tuts 41, S. Tzamarias 151,e, P. Tzanis 10, E. Tzovara 99, K. Uchida152, F. Ukegawa 156, P.A. Ulloa Poblete 136c, E.N. Umaka 80, G. Unal 36, M. Unal 11, A. Undrus 29, G. Unel 158, J. Urban 28b, P. Urquijo 104, G. Usai 8, R. Ushioda 153, M. Usman 107, Z. Uysal 21b, L. Vacavant 101, V. Vacek 131, B. Vachon 103, K.O.H. Vadla 124, T. Vafeiadis 36, A. Vaitkus 95, C. Valderanis 108, E. Valdes Santurio 47a,47b, M. Valente 155a, S. Valentinetti 23b,23a, A. Valero 161, A. Vallier 101, J.A. Valls Ferrer 161, T.R. Van Daalen 137, P. Van Gemmeren 6, M. Van Rijnbach 124,36, S. Van Stroud 95, I. Van Vulpen 113, M. Vanadia 75a,75b, W. Vandelli 36, M. Vandenbroucke 134, E.R. Vandewall 120, D. Vannicola 150, L. Vannoli 57b,57a, R. Vari 74a, E.W. Varnes 7, C. Varni 17a, T. Varol 147, D. Varouchas 66, L. Varriale 161, K.E. Varvell 146, M.E. Vasile 27b, L. Vaslin40, G.A. Vasquez 163, F. Vazeille 40, T. Vazquez Schroeder 36, J. Veatch 31, V. Vecchio 100, M.J. Veen 102, I. Veliscek 125, L.M. Veloce 154, F. Veloso 129a,129c, S. Veneziano 74a, A. Ventura 69a,69b, A. Verbytskyi 109, M. Verducci 73a,73b, C. Vergis 24, M. Verissimo De Araujo 81b, W. Verkerke 113, J.C. Vermeulen 113, C. Vernieri 142, P.J. Verschuuren 94, M. Vessella 102, M.C. Vetterli 141,ad, A. Vgenopoulos 151,e, N. Viaux Maira 136f, T. Vickey 138, O.E. Vickey Boeriu 138, G.H.A. Viehhauser 125, L. Vigani 63b, M. Villa 23b,23a, M. Villaplana Perez 161, E.M. Villhauer52, E. Vilucchi 53, M.G. Vincter 34, G.S. Virdee 20, A. Vishwakarma 52, C. Vittori 23b,23a, I. Vivarelli 145, V. Vladimirov165, E. Voevodina 109, F. Vogel 108, P. Vokac 131, J. Von Ahnen 48, E. Von Toerne 24, B. Vormwald 36, V. Vorobel 132, K. Vorobev 37, M. Vos 161, J.H. Vossebeld 91, M. Vozak 113, L. Vozdecky 93, N. Vranjes 15, M. Vranjes Milosavljevic 15, M. Vreeswijk 113, R. Vuillermet 36, O. Vujinovic 99, I. Vukotic 39, S. Wada 156, C. Wagner102, W. Wagner 169, S. Wahdan 169, H. Wahlberg 89, R. Wakasa 156, M. Wakida 110, V.M. Walbrecht 109, J. Walder 133, R. Walker 108, W. Walkowiak 140, A.M. Wang 61, A.Z. Wang 168, C. Wang 62a, C. Wang 62c, H. Wang 17a, J. Wang 64a, R.-J. Wang 99, R. Wang 61, R. Wang 6, S.M. Wang 147, S. Wang 62b, T. Wang 62a, W.T. Wang 79, X. Wang 14c, X. Wang 160, X. Wang 62c, Y. Wang 62d, Y. Wang 14c, Z. Wang 105, Z. Wang 62d,51,62c, Z. Wang 105, A. Warburton 103, R.J. Ward 20, N. Warrack 59, A.T. Watson 20, H. Watson 59, M.F. Watson 20, G. Watts 137, B.M. Waugh 95, A.F. Webb 11, C. Weber 29, H.A. Weber 18, M.S. Weber 19, S.M. Weber 63a, C. Wei62a, Y. Wei 125, A.R. Weidberg 125, J. Weingarten 49, M. Weirich 99, C. Weiser 54, C.J. Wells 48, T. Wenaus 29, B. Wendland 49, T. Wengler 36, N.S. Wenke109, N. Wermes 24, M. Wessels 63a, K. Whalen 122, A.M. Wharton 90, A.S. White 61, A. White 8, M.J. White 1, D. Whiteson 158, L. Wickremasinghe 123, W. Wiedenmann 168, C. Wiel 50, M. Wielers 133, N. Wieseotte99, C. Wiglesworth 42, L.A.M. Wiik-Fuchs 54, D.J. Wilbern119, H.G. Wilkens 36, D.M. Williams 41, H.H. Williams127, S. Williams 32, S. Willocq 102, P.J. Windischhofer 125, F. Winklmeier 122, B.T. Winter 54, J.K. Winter 100, M. Wittgen142, M. Wobisch 96, R. Wölker 125, J. Wollrath158, M.W. Wolter 85, H. Wolters 129a,129c, V.W.S. Wong 162, A.F. Wongel 48, S.D. Worm 48, B.K. Wosiek 85, K.W. Woźniak 85, K. Wraight 59, J. Wu 14a,14d, M. Wu64a, M. Wu 112, S.L. Wu 168, X. Wu 56, Y. Wu 62a, Z. Wu 134,62a, J. Wuerzinger 125, T.R. Wyatt 100, B.M. Wynne 52, S. Xella 42, L. Xia 14c, M. Xia14b, J. Xiang 64c, X. Xiao 105, M. Xie 62a, X. Xie 62a, S. Xin 14a,14d, J. Xiong 17a, I. Xiotidis145, D. Xu 14a, H. Xu62a, H. Xu 62a, L. Xu 62a, R. Xu 127, T. Xu 105, W. Xu 105, Y. Xu 14b, Z. Xu 62b, Z. Xu 14a, B. Yabsley 146, S. Yacoob 33a, – 35 – JHEP05(2023)028 N. Yamaguchi 88, Y. Yamaguchi 153, H. Yamauchi 156, T. Yamazaki 17a, Y. Yamazaki 83, J. Yan62c, S. Yan 125, Z. Yan 25, H.J. Yang 62c,62d, H.T. Yang 62a, S. Yang 62a, T. Yang 64c, X. Yang 62a, X. Yang 14a, Y. Yang 44, Z. Yang 62a,105, W-M. Yao 17a, Y.C. Yap 48, H. Ye 14c, H. Ye 55, J. Ye 44, S. Ye 29, X. Ye 62a, Y. Yeh 95, I. Yeletskikh 38, B.K. Yeo 17a, M.R. Yexley 90, P. Yin 41, K. Yorita 166, S. Younas 27b, C.J.S. Young 54, C. Young 142, M. Yuan 105, R. Yuan 62b,k, L. Yue 95, X. Yue 63a, M. Zaazoua 35e, B. Zabinski 85, E. Zaid52, T. Zakareishvili 148b, N. Zakharchuk 34, S. Zambito 56, J.A. Zamora Saa 136d,136b, J. Zang 152, D. Zanzi 54, O. Zaplatilek 131, S.V. Zeißner 49, C. Zeitnitz 169, J.C. Zeng 160, D.T. Zenger Jr 26, O. Zenin 37, T. Ženiš 28a, S. Zenz 93, S. Zerradi 35a, D. Zerwas 66, B. Zhang 14c, D.F. Zhang 138, G. Zhang 14b, J. Zhang 62b, J. Zhang 6, K. Zhang 14a,14d, L. Zhang 14c, P. Zhang14a,14d, R. Zhang 168, S. Zhang 105, T. Zhang 152, X. Zhang 62c, X. Zhang 62b, Y. Zhang 62c,5, Z. Zhang 17a, Z. Zhang 66, H. Zhao 137, P. Zhao 51, T. Zhao 62b, Y. Zhao 135, Z. Zhao 62a, A. Zhemchugov 38, X. Zheng 62a, Z. Zheng 142, D. Zhong 160, B. Zhou105, C. Zhou 168, H. Zhou 7, N. Zhou 62c, Y. Zhou7, C.G. Zhu 62b, C. Zhu 14a,14d, H.L. Zhu 62a, H. Zhu 14a, J. Zhu 105, Y. Zhu 62c, Y. Zhu 62a, X. Zhuang 14a, K. Zhukov 37, V. Zhulanov 37, N.I. Zimine 38, J. Zinsser 63b, M. Ziolkowski 140, L. Živković 15, A. Zoccoli 23b,23a, K. Zoch 56, T.G. Zorbas 138, O. Zormpa 46, W. Zou 41, L. Zwalinski 36. 1Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide; Australia 2Department of Physics, University of Alberta, Edmonton AB; Canada 3Department of Physics(a), Ankara University, Ankara; Division of Physics(b), TOBB University of Economics and Technology, Ankara; Türkiye 4LAPP, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS/IN2P3, Annecy; France 5APC, Université Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris; France 6High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne IL; United States of America 7Department of Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson AZ; United States of America 8Department of Physics, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington TX; United States of America 9Physics Department, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens; Greece 10 Physics Department, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou; Greece 11 Department of Physics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX; United States of America 12 Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku; Azerbaijan 13 Institut de Física d’Altes Energies (IFAE), Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Barcelona; Spain 14 Institute of High Energy Physics(a), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing; Physics Department(b), Tsinghua University, Beijing; Department of Physics(c), Nanjing University, Nanjing; University of Chinese Academy of Science (UCAS)(d), Beijing; China 15 Institute of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade; Serbia 16 Department for Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen; Norway 17 Physics Division(a), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley CA; University of California(b), Berkeley CA; United States of America 18 Institut für Physik, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Berlin; Germany 19 Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics and Laboratory for High Energy Physics, University of Bern, Bern; Switzerland 20 School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham; United Kingdom 21 Department of Physics(a), Bogazici University, Istanbul; Department of Physics Engineering(b), Gaziantep University, Gaziantep; Department of Physics(c), Istanbul University, Istanbul; Istinye University(d), Sariyer, Istanbul; Türkiye 22 Facultad de Ciencias y Centro de Investigaciónes(a), Universidad Antonio Nariño, Bogotá; Departamento de Física(b), Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá; Colombia – 36 – JHEP05(2023)028 23 Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia A. Righi(a), Università di Bologna, Bologna; INFN Sezione di Bologna(b); Italy 24 Physikalisches Institut, Universität Bonn, Bonn; Germany 25 Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston MA; United States of America 26 Department of Physics, Brandeis University, Waltham MA; United States of America 27 Transilvania University of Brasov(a), Brasov; Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering(b), Bucharest; Department of Physics(c), Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Iasi; National Institute for Research and Development of Isotopic and Molecular Technologies(d), Physics Department, Cluj-Napoca; University Politehnica Bucharest(e), Bucharest; West University in Timisoara(f), Timisoara; Faculty of Physics(g), University of Bucharest, Bucharest; Romania 28 Faculty of Mathematics(a), Physics and Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava; Department of Subnuclear Physics(b), Institute of Experimental Physics of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Kosice; Slovak Republic 29 Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton NY; United States of America 30 Universidad de Buenos Aires, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Departamento de Física, y CONICET, Instituto de Física de Buenos Aires (IFIBA), Buenos Aires; Argentina 31 California State University, CA; United States of America 32 Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge; United Kingdom 33 Department of Physics(a), University of Cape Town, Cape Town; iThemba Labs(b), Western Cape; Department of Mechanical Engineering Science(c), University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg; National Institute of Physics(d), University of the Philippines Diliman (Philippines); University of South Africa(e), Department of Physics, Pretoria; University of Zululand(f), KwaDlangezwa; School of Physics(g), University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg; South Africa 34 Department of Physics, Carleton University, Ottawa ON; Canada 35 Faculté des Sciences Ain Chock(a), Réseau Universitaire de Physique des Hautes Energies - Université Hassan II, Casablanca; Faculté des Sciences(b), Université Ibn-Tofail, Kénitra; Faculté des Sciences Semlalia(c), Université Cadi Ayyad, LPHEA-Marrakech; LPMR(d), Faculté des Sciences, Université Mohamed Premier, Oujda; Faculté des sciences(e), Université Mohammed V, Rabat; Institute of Applied Physics(f), Mohammed VI Polytechnic University, Ben Guerir; Morocco 36 CERN, Geneva; Switzerland 37 Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN 38 Affiliated with an international laboratory covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN 39 Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago IL; United States of America 40 LPC, Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, Clermont-Ferrand; France 41 Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington NY; United States of America 42 Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen; Denmark 43 Dipartimento di Fisica(a), Università della Calabria, Rende; INFN Gruppo Collegato di Cosenza(b), Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati; Italy 44 Physics Department, Southern Methodist University, Dallas TX; United States of America 45 Physics Department, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX; United States of America 46 National Centre for Scientific Research "Demokritos", Agia Paraskevi; Greece 47 Department of Physics(a), Stockholm University; Oskar Klein Centre(b), Stockholm; Sweden 48 Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg and Zeuthen; Germany 49 Fakultät Physik , Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund; Germany 50 Institut für Kernund Teilchenphysik, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden; Germany 51 Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham NC; United States of America 52 SUPA - School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh; United Kingdom 53 INFN e Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati; Italy 54 Physikalisches Institut, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Freiburg; Germany 55 II. Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen; Germany 56 Département de Physique Nucléaire et Corpusculaire, Université de Genève, Genève; Switzerland – 37 – JHEP05(2023)028 57 Dipartimento di Fisica(a), Università di Genova, Genova; INFN Sezione di Genova(b); Italy 58 II. Physikalisches Institut, Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen, Giessen; Germany 59 SUPA - School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow; United Kingdom 60 LPSC, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS/IN2P3, Grenoble INP, Grenoble; France 61 Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Harvard University, Cambridge MA; United States of America 62 Department of Modern Physics and State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics(a), University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei; Institute of Frontier and Interdisciplinary Science and Key Laboratory of Particle Physics and Particle Irradiation (MOE)(b), Shandong University, Qingdao; School of Physics and Astronomy(c), Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Key Laboratory for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology (MOE), SKLPPC, Shanghai; Tsung-Dao Lee Institute(d), Shanghai; China 63 Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik(a), Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg; Physikalisches Institut(b), Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg; Germany 64 Department of Physics(a), Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong; Department of Physics(b), University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; Department of Physics and Institute for Advanced Study(c), Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong; China 65 Department of Physics, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu; Taiwan 66 IJCLab, Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, 91405, Orsay; France 67 Department of Physics, Indiana University, Bloomington IN; United States of America 68 INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine(a), Sezione di Trieste, Udine; ICTP(b), Trieste; Dipartimento Politecnico di Ingegneria e Architettura(c), Università di Udine, Udine; Italy 69 INFN Sezione di Lecce(a); Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica(b), Università del Salento, Lecce; Italy 70 INFN Sezione di Milano(a); Dipartimento di Fisica(b), Università di Milano, Milano; Italy 71 INFN Sezione di Napoli(a); Dipartimento di Fisica(b), Università di Napoli, Napoli; Italy 72 INFN Sezione di Pavia(a); Dipartimento di Fisica(b), Università di Pavia, Pavia; Italy 73 INFN Sezione di Pisa(a); Dipartimento di Fisica E. Fermi(b), Università di Pisa, Pisa; Italy 74 INFN Sezione di Roma(a); Dipartimento di Fisica(b), Sapienza Università di Roma, Roma; Italy 75 INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata(a); Dipartimento di Fisica(b), Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma; Italy 76 INFN Sezione di Roma Tre(a); Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica(b), Università Roma Tre, Roma; Italy 77 INFN-TIFPA(a); Università degli Studi di Trento(b), Trento; Italy 78 Universität Innsbruck, Department of Astro and Particle Physics, Innsbruck; Austria 79 University of Iowa, Iowa City IA; United States of America 80 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames IA; United States of America 81 Departamento de Engenharia Elétrica(a), Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (UFJF), Juiz de Fora; Universidade Federal do Rio De Janeiro COPPE/EE/IF(b), Rio de Janeiro; Instituto de Física(c), Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo; Rio de Janeiro State University(d), Rio de Janeiro; Brazil 82 KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba; Japan 83 Graduate School of Science, Kobe University, Kobe; Japan 84 AGH University of Science and Technology(a), Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Krakow; Marian Smoluchowski Institute of Physics(b), Jagiellonian University, Krakow; Poland 85 Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow; Poland 86 Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto; Japan 87 Kyoto University of Education, Kyoto; Japan 88 Research Center for Advanced Particle Physics and Department of Physics, Kyushu University, Fukuoka ; Japan 89 Instituto de Física La Plata, Universidad Nacional de La Plata and CONICET, La Plata; Argentina – 38 – JHEP05(2023)028 90 Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster; United Kingdom 91 Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool; United Kingdom 92 Department of Experimental Particle Physics, Jožef Stefan Institute and Department of Physics, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana; Slovenia 93 School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary University of London, London; United Kingdom 94 Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham; United Kingdom 95 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London; United Kingdom 96 Louisiana Tech University, Ruston LA; United States of America 97 Fysiska institutionen, Lunds universitet, Lund; Sweden 98 Departamento de Física Teorica C-15 and CIAFF, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid; Spain 99 Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz; Germany 100 School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester; United Kingdom 101 CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université, CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille; France 102 Department of Physics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA; United States of America 103 Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal QC; Canada 104 School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria; Australia 105 Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI; United States of America 106 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing MI; United States of America 107 Group of Particle Physics, University of Montreal, Montreal QC; Canada 108 Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München; Germany 109 Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München; Germany 110 Graduate School of Science and Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute, Nagoya University, Nagoya; Japan 111 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM; United States of America 112 Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud University/Nikhef, Nijmegen; Netherlands 113 Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam; Netherlands 114 Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb IL; United States of America 115 New York University Abu Dhabi(a), Abu Dhabi; United Arab Emirates University(b), Al Ain; University of Sharjah(c), Sharjah; United Arab Emirates 116 Department of Physics, New York University, New York NY; United States of America 117 Ochanomizu University, Otsuka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo; Japan 118 Ohio State University, Columbus OH; United States of America 119 Homer L. Dodge Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Oklahoma, Norman OK; United States of America 120 Department of Physics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater OK; United States of America 121 Palacký University, Joint Laboratory of Optics, Olomouc; Czech Republic 122 Institute for Fundamental Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR; United States of America 123 Graduate School of Science, Osaka University, Osaka; Japan 124 Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo; Norway 125 Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford; United Kingdom 126 LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Université Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris; France 127 Department of Physics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA; United States of America 128 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh PA; United States of America 129 Laboratório de Instrumentação e Física Experimental de Partículas - LIP(a), Lisboa; Departamento de Física(b), Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa; Departamento de Física(c), Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra; Centro de Física Nuclear da Universidade de Lisboa(d), Lisboa; Departamento de Física(e), Universidade do Minho, Braga; Departamento de Física Teórica y del – 39 – JHEP05(2023)028 Cosmos(f), Universidad de Granada, Granada (Spain); Departamento de Física, Instituto Superior Técnico(g), Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa; Portugal 130 Institute of Physics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague; Czech Republic 131 Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague; Czech Republic 132 Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Prague; Czech Republic 133 Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot; United Kingdom 134 IRFU, CEA, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette; France 135 Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz CA; United States of America 136 Departamento de Física(a), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago; Millennium Institute for Subatomic physics at high energy frontier (SAPHIR)(b), Santiago; Instituto de Investigación Multidisciplinario en Ciencia y Tecnología(c), y Departamento de Física, Universidad de La Serena; Universidad Andres Bello(d), Department of Physics, Santiago; Instituto de Alta Investigación(e), Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica; Departamento de Física(f), Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Valparaíso; Chile 137 Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle WA; United States of America 138 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield; United Kingdom 139 Department of Physics, Shinshu University, Nagano; Japan 140 Department Physik, Universität Siegen, Siegen; Germany 141 Department of Physics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby BC; Canada 142 SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford CA; United States of America 143 Department of Physics, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm; Sweden 144 Departments of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook NY; United States of America 145 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sussex, Brighton; United Kingdom 146 School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney; Australia 147 Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei; Taiwan 148 E. Andronikashvili Institute of Physics(a), Iv. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi; High Energy Physics Institute(b), Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi; University of Georgia(c), Tbilisi; Georgia 149 Department of Physics, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa; Israel 150 Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv; Israel 151 Department of Physics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki; Greece 152 International Center for Elementary Particle Physics and Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Tokyo; Japan 153 Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo; Japan 154 Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto ON; Canada 155 TRIUMF(a), Vancouver BC; Department of Physics and Astronomy(b), York University, Toronto ON; Canada 156 Division of Physics and Tomonaga Center for the History of the Universe, Faculty of Pure and Applied Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba; Japan 157 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts University, Medford MA; United States of America 158 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine CA; United States of America 159 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Uppsala, Uppsala; Sweden 160 Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana IL; United States of America 161 Instituto de Física Corpuscular (IFIC), Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia; Spain 162 Department of Physics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC; Canada 163 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria BC; Canada 164 Fakultät für Physik und Astronomie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg; Germany – 40 –