Electron reconstruction and identification in the ATLAS experiment using the 2015 and 2016 LHC proton–proton collision data at $$\sqrt{s} = 13$$ $$\text {TeV}$$

Abstract

Electron reconstruction and identification in the ATLAS experiment using the 2015 and 2016 LHC proton-proton collision data at √ s = 13 TeVThe ATLAS Collaboration Algorithms used for the reconstruction and identification of electrons in the central region of the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) are presented in this paper; these algorithms are used in ATLAS physics analyses that involve electrons in the final state and which are based on the 2015 and 2016 proton-proton collision data produced by the LHC at √ s = 13 TeV. The performance of the electron reconstruction, identification, isolation, and charge identification algorithms is evaluated in data and in simulated samples using electrons from Z → ee and J/ψ → ee decays. Typical examples of combinations of electron reconstruction, identification, and isolation operating points used in ATLAS physics analyses are shown.

The simplest of them all: $$ t\overline{t}{W}^{\pm } $$ at NLO accuracy in QCD

“…it is defined with the help of observable final states that pass all the cuts that we shall specify in the following. Furthermore, since the electron and the muon reconstruction and charge identification can be performed at the LHC with very high efficiency [81,82], we can distinguish between µ − and e + in our studies. To differentiate between the two positrons, however, the ordering in p T is introduced.…”

Measurement of the $$t\bar{t}$$ production cross-section and lepton differential distributions in $$e\mu $$ dilepton events from pp collisions at $$\sqrt{s}=13\,\text {TeV}$$ with the ATLAS detector

“…Electron candidates were reconstructed from a localised cluster of energy deposits in the electromagnetic calorimeter matched to a track in the inner detector, passing the 'Tight' likelihood-based requirement of Ref. [63]. They were required to have transverse energy E T > 20 GeV and pseudorapidity |η| < 2.47, excluding the transition region between the barrel and endcap electromagnetic calorimeters, 1.37 < |η| < 1.52.…”

“…The modelling of the electron and muon identification efficiencies was studied using Z → ee/μμ events, as described in Refs. [63,64]. Small corrections were applied to the simulation, and the correlations in the associated systematic uncertainties as a function of lepton p T and η were taken into account and propagated to all differential distributions.…”

Robust Independent Validation of Experiment and Theory: Rivet version 3

“…In addition to this machinery, a large number of standard efficiency and smearing parametrisations for ATLAS and CMS have been implemented, based on a mix of DELPHES configurations and experiment reconstruction performance papers [92][93][94][95][96][97][98][99][100][101][102][103][104]. These in turn are based on generic helper functions such as Gaussian p T or mass smearers, b-tag efficiency/fake samplers, etc., which also act as a useful foundation on which users can build their own detector parametrisations.…”