2016
DOI: 10.1103/physrevd.93.015021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mass reconstruction withM2under constraint in semi-invisible production at a hadron collider

Abstract: The mass-constraining variable M 2 , a (1 + 3)-dimensional natural successor of extremely popular M T 2 , possesses an array of rich features having the ability to use on-shell mass constraints in semi-invisible production at a hadron collider. In this work, we investigate the consequence of applying a heavy resonance mass-shell constraint in the context of a semi-invisible antler decay topology produced at the LHC. Our proposed variable, under additional constraint, develops a new kink solution at the true ma… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
19
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
0
19
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Operationally the values are assigned by extremizing some relevant function of the invisible momenta. Often the minimum of the function itself becomes a useful kinematic variable -some well-known examples include the Cambridge M T 2 variable [28,29] and its variants [30][31][32][33], the √ s min variable [34][35][36], a variety of constrained transverse mass variables [37][38][39][40], the M CT 2 variable [41,42], the M 2C variable [43,44], the MAOS method [45][46][47][48], the M 2 class of variables [49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56], etc. While this approach has useful practical applications, it still only represents an approximate treatment and does not lead to a mass reconstruction through a bump.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Operationally the values are assigned by extremizing some relevant function of the invisible momenta. Often the minimum of the function itself becomes a useful kinematic variable -some well-known examples include the Cambridge M T 2 variable [28,29] and its variants [30][31][32][33], the √ s min variable [34][35][36], a variety of constrained transverse mass variables [37][38][39][40], the M CT 2 variable [41,42], the M 2C variable [43,44], the MAOS method [45][46][47][48], the M 2 class of variables [49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56], etc. While this approach has useful practical applications, it still only represents an approximate treatment and does not lead to a mass reconstruction through a bump.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 contained an additional two-body decay to a visible particle, just 5 events are sufficient for solving the event kinematics [22,27]. 3 Transversality is not strictly necessary, in fact it may even be beneficial to work with 3 + 1-dimensional variants of those variables [36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1(d) and 1(e). The latter is known as the "antler" topology [81] and has been previously discussed in the context of both hadron colliders [12,[81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90] and lepton colliders [91,92]. At the same time, the diagram of Fig.…”
Section: Two Decay Chains Each With One Two-body Decaymentioning
confidence: 93%