- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Improving the direct determination of |Vts| using deep learning

Jeewon Heo1, Woojin Jang1, Jason S. H. Lee1,*, Youn Jung Roh1, Ian James Watson1,†, and Seungjin Yang2

  • *Contact author: jason.lee@uos.ac.kr
  • †Contact author: ian.james.watson@cern.ch
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 052003 – Published 11 September, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/6l2r-ycj7

Abstract

An s-jet tagging approach to determine the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix component |Vts| directly in the dileptonic final state events of the top pair production in proton-proton collisions has been previously studied by measuring the branching fraction of the decay of one of the top quarks by t→sW. The main challenge is improving the discrimination performance between strange jets from top decays and other jets. This study proposes novel jet discriminators, called disaja, using a Transformer-based deep learning method. The first model, disaja-h, utilizes multidomain inputs (jets, leptons, and missing transverse momentum). An additional model, disaja-l, further improves the setup by using lower-level jet constituent information, rather than the high-level clustered information. disaja-l is a novel model that combines low-level jet constituent analysis with event classification using multidomain inputs. The model performance is evaluated via a CMS-like LHC Run 2 fast simulation by comparing various statistical test results to those from a Transformer-based jet classifier which considers only the individual jets. This study shows that the disaja models have significant performance gains over the individual jet classifier, and we show the potential of the measurement during Run 3 of the LHC and the High-Luminosity LHC.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (66)

  1. M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, CP violation in the renormalizable theory of weak interaction, Prog. Theor. Phys. 49, 652 (1973).
  2. P. A. Zyla et al. (Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2020, 083C01 (2020).
  3. J. Alwall, R. Frederix, J. M. Gerard, A. Giammanco, M. Herquet, S. Kalinin, E. Kou, V. Lemaitre, and F. Maltoni, Is V(tb)≃1?, Eur. Phys. J. C 49, 791 (2007).
  4. A. Lenz and U. Nierste, Theoretical update of Bs−B¯s mixing, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2007) 072.
  5. D. King, A. Lenz, and T. Rauh, Bs mixing observables and |Vtd/Vts| from sum rules, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2019) 034.
  6. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Precise determination of the Bs0–B¯s0 oscillation frequency, Nat. Phys. 18, 1 (2022).
  7. Y. Aoki et al. (Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) Collaboration), FLAG review 2021, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 869 (2022).
  8. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Measurement of CKM matrix elements in single top quark t-channel production in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV, Phys. Lett. B 808, 135609 (2020).
  9. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Measurement of t-channel production of single top quarks and antiquarks in pp collisions at 13 TeV using the full ATLAS run 2 data sample, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2024) 305.
  10. A. Ali, F. Barreiro, and T. Lagouri, Prospects of measuring the CKM matrix element |Vts| at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 693, 44 (2010).
  11. W. Jang, J. S. H. Lee, I. Park, and I. J. Watson, Measuring |Vts| directly using strange-quark tagging at the LHC, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 81, 377 (2022).
  12. D. A. Faroughy, J. F. Kamenik, M. Szewc, and J. Zupan, Accessing CKM suppressed top decays at the LHC, SciPost Phys. 16, 131 (2024).
  13. P. Abreu et al. (The DELPHI Collaboration), Measurement of the strange quark forward-backward asymmetry around the z0 peak, Eur. Phys. J. C 14, 613 (2000).
  14. K. Abe et al. (The SLD Collaboration), First direct measurement of the parity-violating coupling of the z0 to the s quark, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5059 (2000).
  15. J. Duarte-Campderros, G. Perez, M. Schlaffer, and A. Soffer, Probing the Higgs–strange-quark coupling at e+e− colliders using light-jet flavor tagging, Phys. Rev. D 101, 115005 (2020).
  16. A. Albert et al., Strange quark as a probe for new physics in the Higgs sector, in Snowmass 2021 (2022), .
  17. J. Erdmann, A tagger for strange jets based on tracking information using long short-term memory, J. Instrum. 15, P01021 (2020).
  18. J. Erdmann, O. Nackenhorst, and S. V. Zeißner, Maximum performance of strange-jet tagging at hadron colliders, J. Instrum. 16, P08039 (2021).
  19. Y. Nakai, D. Shih, and S. Thomas, Strange jet tagging, arXiv:2003.09517.
  20. F. Bedeschi, L. Gouskos, and M. Selvaggi, Jet flavour tagging for future colliders with fast simulation, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 646 (2022).
  21. F. Blekman, F. Canelli, A. De Moor, K. Gautam, A. Ilg, A. Macchiolo, and E. Ploerer, Tagging more quark jet flavours at FCC-ee at 91 GeV with a transformer-based neural network, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 165 (2025).
  22. Y. Kats and E. Ofir, From strange-quark tagging to fragmentation tagging with machine learning, Phys. Rev. D 111, 034003 (2025).
  23. J. S. H. Lee, I. Park, I. J. Watson, and S. Yang, Zero-permutation jet-parton assignment using a self-attention network, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 84, 427 (2024).
  24. J. Pearkes, W. Fedorko, A. Lister, and C. Gay, Jet constituents for deep neural network based top quark tagging, arXiv:1704.02124.
  25. H. Qu, C. Li, and S. Qian, Particle transformer for jet tagging, in Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR (2022). arXiv:2202.03772.
  26. ATLAS Collaboration, Constituent-based top-quark tagging with the ATLAS detector, Technical Report, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2022-039, CERN, 2022.
  27. ATLAS Collaboration, Constituent-based quark gluon tagging using transformers with the ATLAS detector, Technical Report, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2023-032, CERN, 2023.
  28. J. A. Raine, M. Leigh, K. Zoch, and T. Golling, Fast and improved neutrino reconstruction in multineutrino final states with conditional normalizing flows, Phys. Rev. D 109, 012005 (2024).
  29. S. Qiu, S. Han, X. Ju, B. Nachman, and H. Wang, Holistic approach to predicting top quark kinematic properties with the covariant particle transformer, Phys. Rev. D 107, 114029 (2023).
  30. I. Zurbano Fernandez et al., High-luminosity large hadron collider (HL-LHC): Technical design report, CERN Yellow Reports, 10.23731/CYRM-2020-0010 (2020), p. 10.
  31. J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, H. S. Shao, T. Stelzer, P. Torrielli, and M. Zaro, The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2014) 079.
  32. R. D. Ball et al. (NNPDF Collaboration), Parton distributions from high-precision collider data, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 663 (2017).
  33. M. Czakon and A. Mitov, top++: A program for the calculation of the top-pair cross-section at hadron colliders, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 2930 (2014).
  34. T. Sjöstrand, S. Ask, J. R. Christiansen, R. Corke, N. Desai, P. Ilten, S. Mrenna, S. Prestel, C. O. Rasmussen, and P. Z. Skands, An introduction to pythia 8.2, Comput. Phys. Commun. 191, 159 (2015).
  35. T. Gehrmann, M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, P. Maierhöfer, A. von Manteuffel, S. Pozzorini, D. Rathlev, and L. Tancredi, W+W− production at hadron colliders in next to next to leading order QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 212001 (2014).
  36. M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, D. Rathlev, and M. Wiesemann, W±Z production at hadron colliders in NNLO QCD, Phys. Lett. B 761, 179 (2016).
  37. F. Cascioli, T. Gehrmann, M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, P. Maierhöfer, A. von Manteuffel, S. Pozzorini, D. Rathlev, L. Tancredi, and E. Weihs, ZZ production at hadron colliders in NNLO QCD, Phys. Lett. B 735, 311 (2014).
  38. R. Frederix and S. Frixione, Merging meets matching in MC@NLO, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2012) 061.
  39. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS pythia8 tunes from underlying-event measurements, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 4 (2020).
  40. J. de Favereau, C. Delaere, P. Demin, A. Giammanco, V. Lemaître, A. Mertens, and M. Selvaggi (delphes 3 Collaboration), delphes 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2014) 057.
  41. M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, fastjet user manual, Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 1896 (2012).
  42. CMS Collaboration, Identification of b quark jets at the CMS experiment in the LHC run 2, Technical Report, Report No. CMS-PAS-BTV-15-001, CERN, Geneva, 2016.
  43. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV, J. Instrum. 13, P05011 (2017).
  44. CMS Collaboration, Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker, J. Instrum. 9, P10009 (2014).
  45. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Measurements of tt¯ differential cross sections in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV using events containing two leptons, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 149.
  46. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Measurement of the tt¯ production cross section, the top quark mass, and the strong coupling constant using dilepton events in pp collisions at s=13  TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 368 (2019).
  47. A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Measurement of the top quark pole mass using tt¯+jet events in the dilepton final state in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2023) 077.
  48. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC, J. Instrum. 16, P05014 (2020).
  49. A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, L. u. Kaiser, and I. Polosukhin, Attention is all you need, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, edited by I. Guyon, U. V. Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett (Curran Associates, Inc., Red Hook, New York, USA, 2017), Vol. 30.
  50. D. Hendrycks and K. Gimpel, Gaussian error linear units (GELUs), arXiv:1606.08415.
  51. N. Srivastava, G. Hinton, A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and R. Salakhutdinov, Dropout: A simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15, 1929 (2014).
  52. CMS Collaboration, Performance of quark/gluon discrimination in 8 TeV pp data, Technical Report, Report No. CMS-PAS-JME-13-002, CERN, Geneva, 2013.
  53. T. Cornelis (CMS Collaboration), Quark-gluon jet discrimination at CMS, in 2nd Large Hadron Collider Physics Conference (2014), arXiv:1409.3072.
  54. R. D. Field and R. P. Feynman, A parametrization of the properties of quark jets, Nucl. Phys. B136, 1 (1978).
  55. D. Krohn, M. D. Schwartz, T. Lin, and W. J. Waalewijn, Jet charge at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 212001 (2013).
  56. W. J. Waalewijn, Calculating the charge of a jet, Phys. Rev. D 86, 094030 (2012).
  57. I. Loshchilov and F. Hutter, Decoupled weight decay regularization, arXiv:1711.05101.
  58. S. Watanabe, Tree-structured parzen estimator: Understanding its algorithm components and their roles for better empirical performance, arXiv:2304.11127.
  59. T. Akiba, S. Sano, T. Yanase, T. Ohta, and M. Koyama, Optuna: A next-generation hyperparameter optimization framework, arXiv:1907.10902.
  60. A. Hayrapetyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: COMBINE, Comput. Software Big Sci. 8, 19 (2024).
  61. CMS Collaboration, Jet energy scale and resolution performance with 13 TeV data collected by CMS in 2016-2018, Technical Report, Report No. CMS-DP-2020-019, CERN, 2020.
  62. CMS Collaboration, Jet energy scale and resolution measurement with run 2 legacy data collected by CMS at 13 TeV, Technical Report, Report No. CMS-DP-2021-033, CERN, 2021.
  63. G. Agarwal (CMS Collaboration), Jet energy scale and resolution measurements in CMS, Proc. Sci. ICHEP2022 (2022) 652 [arXiv:2301.02175].
  64. J. Butterworth et al., PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC run II, J. Phys. G 43, 023001 (2016).
  65. G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1554 (2011); 73, 2501(E) (2013).
  66. J. Heo, W. Jang, J. S. H. Lee, Y. Jung Roh, I. James Watson, and S. Yang, Improving the direct determination of |Vts| using Deep Learning, 10.5281/zenodo.14862734.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 052003– Published 11 September, 2025
  • Received 16 February 2025
  • Accepted 11 August 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation