- 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 sensitivity of vectorlike top partner searches with jet substructure

Anupam Ghosh1,*, Soumyadip Ghosh2,†, Soureek Mitra3,‡, Tousik Samui4,§, and Ritesh K. Singh2,∥

  • *Contact author: anupamg@rnd.iitg.ac.in
  • †Contact author: sg22rs009@iiserkol.ac.in
  • ‡Contact author: soureekmitra@iisermohali.ac.in
  • §Contact author: tousiks@imsc.res.in
  • ∥Contact author: ritesh.singh@iiserkol.ac.in
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 113, 035034 – Published 26 February, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/dhs6-gcn9

Abstract

Vectorlike quark partners appear in many models beyond the Standard Model and remain an important area of research, as they can offer insights into the electroweak symmetry breaking mechanism. In this work, we have focused on studying the production of a heavy vectorlike top partner in association with a Standard Model top quark via chromomagnetic coupling and the four decay modes of the top partner, namely, bW, tZ, th, and tg. The signal has been studied in final states with one fat jet, at least one b-tagged jet, one lepton, and missing energy. This study focuses on the extensive use of jet substructure techniques in jets clustered with fixed and dynamically varying radius to deal with events containing differently sized jets. Important kinematic information, along with jet substructure and event shape observables, has been used in a multivariate analysis to extract signals with high significance. A comparative study between fixed and dynamically varying radius clustering of jets is also presented, leading to an improvement in signal sensitivity in the highly boosted scenario.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (130)

  1. G. F. Giudice, Naturalness after LHC8, Proc. Sci., EPS-HEP2013 (2013) 163 [arXiv:1307.7879].
  2. N. Arkani-Hamed, K. Blum, R. T. D’Agnolo, and J. Fan, 2∶1 for naturalness at the LHC?, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2013) 149.
  3. S. Alekhin, A. Djouadi, and S. Moch, The top quark and Higgs boson masses and the stability of the electroweak vacuum, Phys. Lett. B 716, 214 (2012).
  4. G. Degrassi, S. Di Vita, J. Elias-Miró, J. R. Espinosa, G. F. Giudice, G. Isidori, and A. Strumia, Higgs mass and vacuum stability in the Standard Model at NNLO, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2012) 098.
  5. S. Dawson and P. Jaiswal, Four generations, Higgs physics, and the MSSM, Phys. Rev. D 82, 073017 (2010).
  6. C. D. Froggatt and H. B. Nielsen, Hierarchy of quark masses, Cabibbo angles and CP violation, Nucl. Phys. B147, 277 (1979).
  7. H. Fritzsch and Z.-Z. Xing, Mass and flavor mixing schemes of quarks and leptons, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 45, 1 (2000).
  8. A. Riotto and M. Trodden, Recent progress in baryogenesis, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 49, 35 (1999).
  9. M. Dine and A. Kusenko, Origin of the matter-antimatter asymmetry, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 1 (2003).
  10. D. Clowe, M. Bradač, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones, and D. Zaritsky, A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter, Astrophys. J. Lett. 648, L109 (2006).
  11. Y. Sofue and V. Rubin, Rotation curves of spiral galaxies, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 39, 137 (2001).
  12. M. Perelstein, M. E. Peskin, and A. Pierce, Top quarks and electroweak symmetry breaking in little Higgs models, Phys. Rev. D 69, 075002 (2004).
  13. O. Matsedonskyi, G. Panico, and A. Wulzer, Light top partners for a light composite Higgs, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2013) 164.
  14. M. S. Chanowitz, M. A. Furman, and I. Hinchliffe, Weak interactions of ultra heavy fermions (II), Nucl. Phys. B153, 402 (1979).
  15. J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, R. Benbrik, S. Heinemeyer, and M. Pérez-Victoria, Handbook of vectorlike quarks: Mixing and single production, Phys. Rev. D 88, 094010 (2013).
  16. A. Falkowski, D. M. Straub, and A. Vicente, Vector-like leptons: Higgs decays and collider phenomenology, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2014) 092.
  17. S. Dawson and E. Furlan, A Higgs conundrum with vector fermions, Phys. Rev. D 86, 015021 (2012).
  18. F. del Aguila, L. Ametller, G. L. Kane, and J. Vidal, Vector-like fermion and standard Higgs production at hadron colliders, Nucl. Phys. B334, 1 (1990).
  19. CMS Collaboration, Review of searches for vector-like quarks, vector-like leptons, and heavy neutral leptons in proton–proton collisions at s=13  TeV at the CMS experiment, Phys. Rep. 1115, 570 (2025).
  20. G. Hiller, T. Höhne, D. F. Litim, and T. Steudtner, Portals into Higgs vacuum stability, Phys. Rev. D 106, 115004 (2022).
  21. A. Ghosh and P. Konar, Unveiling desert region in inert doublet model assisted by Peccei-Quinn symmetry, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2024) 104.
  22. S. Colucci, B. Fuks, F. Giacchino, L. Lopez Honorez, M. H. G. Tytgat, and J. Vandecasteele, Top-philic vector-like portal to scalar dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 98, 035002 (2018).
  23. A. Ghosh, Unveiling a natural multicomponent dark sector: An inert doublet guided by Peccei–Quinn, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 140, 688 (2025).
  24. A. Ghosh, P. Konar, and R. Roshan, Top-philic dark matter in a hybrid KSVZ axion framework, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2022) 167.
  25. A. Ghosh and P. Konar, Precision prediction of a democratic up-family philic KSVZ axion model at the LHC, Phys. Dark Universe 47, 101746 (2025).
  26. A. J. Larkoski, I. Moult, and B. Nachman, Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: A review of recent advances in theory and machine learning, Phys. Rep. 841, 1 (2020).
  27. S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and M. Spannowsky, Looking Inside Jets: An Introduction to Jet Substructure and Boosted-Object Phenomenology, Vol. 958 (Springer, New York, 2019), 10.1007/978-3-030-15709-8.
  28. R. Kogler et al., Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: Experimental review, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 045003 (2019).
  29. G. P. Salam, Towards jetography, Eur. Phys. J. C 67, 637 (2010).
  30. S. Sapeta, QCD and jets at hadron colliders, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 89, 1 (2016).
  31. J. M. Duarte, Novel machine learning applications at the LHC, Proc. Sci., ICHEP2024 (2025) 012 [arXiv:2409.20413].
  32. A. Radovic, M. Williams, D. Rousseau, M. Kagan, D. Bonacorsi, A. Himmel, A. Aurisano, K. Terao, and T. Wongjirad, Machine learning at the energy and intensity frontiers of particle physics, Nature (London) 560, 41 (2018).
  33. CMS Collaboration, 2020 CMS data preservation, re-use and open access policy, 2020. 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.1BNU.8V1W.
  34. ALICE, ATLAS, CMS, and LHCb Collaborations, CERN Open Data Policy for the LHC Experiments, CERN Technical Report CERN-OPEN-2020-013, 2020, 10.17181/CERN.QXNK.8L2G.
  35. B. Mukhopadhyaya, T. Samui, and R. K. Singh, Dynamic radius jet clustering algorithm, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2023) 019.
  36. G. F. Sterman and S. Weinberg, Jets from quantum chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39, 1436 (1977).
  37. A. J. Larkoski, G. P. Salam, and J. Thaler, Energy correlation functions for jet substructure, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2013) 108.
  38. D. Kar, W. Nzuza, and S. Sinha, 2B or not 2B, a study of bottom-quark-philic semi-visible jets, SciPost Phys. Core 7, 071 (2024).
  39. B. Mukhopadhyaya, S. Samanta, T. Samui, and R. K. Singh, Novel signals for the type-X two-Higgs-doublet scenario at the Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. D 108, 075004 (2023).
  40. A. Ghosh, P. Konar, T. Samui, and R. K. Singh, Jet substructure probe on scalar leptoquark models via top polarization, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2025) 145.
  41. M. Buchkremer, G. Cacciapaglia, A. Deandrea, and L. Panizzi, Model-independent framework for searches of top partners, Nucl. Phys. B876, 376 (2013).
  42. D. Choudhury, K. Deka, and N. Kumar, Looking for a vectorlike B quark at the LHC using jet substructure, Phys. Rev. D 104, 035004 (2021).
  43. S. Balaji, Asymmetry in flavour changing electromagnetic transitions of vector-like quarks, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2022) 015.
  44. ATLAS Collaboration, Search for new particles in final states with a boosted top quark and missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV with the ATLAS detector, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2024) 263.
  45. CMS Collaboration, Search for a vector-like quark T′→tH via the diphoton decay mode of the Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2023) 057.
  46. CMS Collaboration, Search for production of a single vectorlike quark decaying to tH or tZ in the all-hadronic final state in pp collisions at s=13  TeV, Phys. Rev. D 110, 072012 (2024).
  47. A. Hayreter and G. Valencia, T-odd correlations from the top-quark chromoelectric dipole moment in lepton plus jets top-pair events, Phys. Rev. D 93, 014020 (2016).
  48. CMS Collaboration, Search for CP violation using tt¯ events in the lepton+jets channel in pp collisions at s=13  TeV, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 081.
  49. CMS Collaboration, Search for pair production of vector-like quarks in leptonic final states in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2023) 020.
  50. CMS Collaboration, Search for single production of a vector-like T quark decaying to a top quark and a neutral scalar boson in lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV, arXiv:2510.25874.
  51. A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler, Soft drop, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2014) 146.
  52. J. Thaler and K. Van Tilburg, Identifying boosted objects with N-subjettiness, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2011) 015.
  53. J. D. Bjorken and S. J. Brodsky, Statistical model for electron-positron annihilation into hadrons, Phys. Rev. D 1, 1416 (1970).
  54. J. F. Donoghue, F. E. Low, and S.-Y. Pi, Tensor analysis of hadronic jets in quantum chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 20, 2759 (1979).
  55. ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of event shapes at large momentum transfer with the ATLAS detector in pp collisions at s=7  TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 2211 (2012).
  56. G. C. Fox and S. Wolfram, Event shapes in e+e− annihilation, Nucl. Phys. B149, 413 (1979); B157, 543(E) (1979).
  57. C. Bernaciak, M. S. A. Buschmann, A. Butter, and T. Plehn, Fox-Wolfram moments in Higgs physics, Phys. Rev. D 87, 073014 (2013).
  58. 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.
  59. R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, D. Pagani, H. S. Shao, and M. Zaro, The automation of next-to-leading order electroweak calculations, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2018) 185.
  60. C. Bierlich et al., A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3, SciPost Phys. Codebases 2022, 8 (2022).
  61. DELPHES 3 Collaboration, delphes 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2014) 057.
  62. N. D. Christensen and C. Duhr, feynrules—Feynman rules made easy, Comput. Phys. Commun. 180, 1614 (2009).
  63. A. Alloul, N. D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr, and B. Fuks, feynrules 2.0—A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 2250 (2014).
  64. C. Degrande, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, D. Grellscheid, O. Mattelaer, and T. Reiter, UFO—The Universal feynrules output, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 1201 (2012).
  65. NNPDF Collaboration, Parton distributions for the LHC Run II, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2015) 040.
  66. ATLAS Collaboration, Study of Higgs boson pair production in the HH→bb¯γγ final state with 308  fb−1 of data collected at s=13  TeV and 13.6 TeV by the ATLAS experiment, arXiv:2507.03495.
  67. J. Zhang, H.-Y. Jin, and T. G. Steele, One loop corrections to the trilinear self coupling of the Higgs boson in the Standard Model with inclusion of singlet vector-like top quark, arXiv:2510.14425.
  68. CMS Collaboration, Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 155 (2016).
  69. P. Skands, S. Carrazza, and J. Rojo, Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: The Monash 2013 tune, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 3024 (2014).
  70. CMS Collaboration, Simulated dataset TTJets TuneCUETP8M1 13 TeV-madgraphMLM-pythia8 in MINIAODSIM format for 2015 collision data, 2021, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.4UC1.XE6W, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.TRGR.ISWK, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.QSCL.T5V6, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.P6DS.TA9G, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.3OFU.QCHW, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.ZLCL.5OLD, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.NIW3.SWVK, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.MY34.FGWJ, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.EAFA.TRYV, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.T3IH.3GLZ.
  71. CMS Collaboration, Simulated dataset tW top and antitop inclusiveDecays 13 TeV-powheg-pythia8 TuneCUETP8M1 in MINIAODSIM format for 2015 collision data, 2021, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.EKZ2.EXSU, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.JG3K.U1HH.
  72. CMS Collaboration, Simulated dataset ttZJets 13 TeV madgraphMLM in MINIAODSIM format for 2015 collision data, 2021, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.68LT.V5HE.
  73. CMS Collaboration, Simulated dataset TTWJets TuneCUETP8M1 13 TeV-amcatnloFXFX-madspin-pythia8 in MINIAODSIM format for 2015 collision data, 2021, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.Y9YE.GSCH, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.2J3N.SAEU.
  74. CMS Collaboration, Simulated dataset WZJets 13 TeV-pythia8 in MINIAODSIM format for 2015 collision data, 2021, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.OT9K.8B6X, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.RBRF.G35V, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.B0AH.8063, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.2IZ1.BFHY.
  75. CMS Collaboration, Simulated dataset WWJets 13 TeV-powheg in MINIAODSIM format for 2015 collision data, 2021, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.8SBL.SMML, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.N1NR.ZKCS.
  76. CMS Collaboration, Simulated dataset QCD TuneCUETP8M1 13 TeV pythia8 in MINIAODSIM format for 2015 collision data, 2021, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.9S1H.GPAZ, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.AQYT.7JKJ, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.XXOE.WFX4, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.2ZYM.S9ZX, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.WFJA.FPGG, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.9OJV.RZ4U, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.O3DT.38EH, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.5DBS.XCW8, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.3Y72.BWW4, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.SGRV.4ABD, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.WOP0.TFY9, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.N49K.1FTR, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.KN7J.TCST, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.OV3H.MOWO, 10.7483/OPENDATA.CMS.RMU2.D9II.
  77. R. Frederix and S. Frixione, Merging meets matching in MC@NLO, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2012) 061.
  78. K. Ehatäht and C. Veelken, Stitching Monte Carlo samples, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 484 (2022).
  79. E. Re, Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method, Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1547 (2011).
  80. P. Nason, A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2004) 040.
  81. S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari, Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: The POWHEG method, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2007) 070.
  82. S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: The POWHEG BOX, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2010) 043.
  83. F. Maltoni, G. Ridolf, and M. Ubiali, b-initiated processes at the LHC: A reappraisal, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2012) 022.
  84. P. Nason and G. Zanderighi, W+W−, WZ and ZZ production in the POWHEG-BOX-V2, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2702 (2014).
  85. M. Mangano, The so-called MLM prescription for ME/PS matching, 2002.
  86. S. Hoeche, F. Krauss, N. Lavesson, L. Lonnblad, M. Mangano, A. Schalicke et al., Matching parton showers and matrix elements, arXiv:hep-ph/0602031.
  87. M. L. Mangano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini, and M. Treccani, Matching matrix elements and shower evolution for top-quark production in hadronic collisions, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2007) 013.
  88. T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands, A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1, Comput. Phys. Commun. 178, 852 (2008).
  89. GEANT4 Collaboration, geant4—A simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 506A, 250 (2003).
  90. 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).
  91. N. Kidonakis and N. Yamanaka, Higher-order corrections for tW production at high-energy hadron colliders, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 278.
  92. A. Kulesza, L. Motyka, D. Schwartländer, T. Stebel, and V. Theeuwes, Associated production of a top quark pair with a heavy electroweak gauge boson at NLO+NNLL accuracy, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 249 (2019).
  93. L. Buonocore, S. Devoto, M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, J. Mazzitelli, L. Rottoli, and C. Savoini, Precise predictions for the associated production of a W boson with a top-Antitop quark pair at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 231901 (2023).
  94. M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, D. Rathlev, and M. Wiesemann, W±Z production at hadron colliders in NNLO QCD, Phys. Lett. B 761, 179 (2016).
  95. M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, S. Pozzorini, D. Rathlev, and M. Wiesemann, W+W− production at the LHC: Fiducial cross sections and distributions in NNLO QCD, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2016) 140.
  96. S. D. Ellis and D. E. Soper, Successive combination jet algorithm for hadron collisions, Phys. Rev. D 48, 3160 (1993).
  97. S. Catani, Y. L. Dokshitzer, M. H. Seymour, and B. R. Webber, Longitudinally invariant Kt clustering algorithms for hadron hadron collisions, Nucl. Phys. B406, 187 (1993).
  98. M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, The anti-kt jet clustering algorithm, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2008) 063.
  99. Y. L. Dokshitzer, G. D. Leder, S. Moretti, and B. R. Webber, Better jet clustering algorithms, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (1997) 001.
  100. M. Wobisch and T. Wengler, Hadronization corrections to jet cross-sections in deep inelastic scattering, in Workshop on Monte Carlo Generators for HERA Physics (Plenary Starting Meeting) (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9907280.
  101. D. Krohn, J. Thaler, and L.-T. Wang, Jets with variable R, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2009) 059.
  102. L. Mackey, B. Nachman, A. Schwartzman, and C. Stansbury, Fuzzy jets, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2016) 010.
  103. D. Ba, A. S. Dogra, R. Gambhir, A. Tasissa, and J. Thaler, SHAPER: Can you hear the shape of a jet?, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 195.
  104. I. W. Stewart, F. J. Tackmann, J. Thaler, C. K. Vermilion, and T. F. Wilkason, XCone: N-jettiness as an exclusive cone jet algorithm, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2015) 072.
  105. S. Mondal, G. Barone, and A. Schmidt, PAIReD jet: A multi-pronged resonance tagging strategy across all Lorentz boosts, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2024) 128.
  106. J. R. Andersen et al., Les Houches 2017: Physics at TeV colliders Standard Model working group report, arXiv:1803.07977.
  107. ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of jet-substructure observables in top quark, W boson and light jet production in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV with the ATLAS detector, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2019) 033.
  108. J. M. Butterworth, A. R. Davison, M. Rubin, and G. P. Salam, Jet substructure as a new Higgs search channel at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 242001 (2008).
  109. M. Dasgupta, A. Fregoso, S. Marzani, and G. P. Salam, Towards an understanding of jet substructure, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2013) 029.
  110. A. J. Larkoski and J. Thaler, Aspects of jets at 100 TeV, Phys. Rev. D 90, 034010 (2014).
  111. A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, and J. Thaler, Sudakov safety in perturbative QCD, Phys. Rev. D 91, 111501 (2015).
  112. CMS Collaboration, Measurement of the Splitting function in pp and Pb-Pb collisions at sNN=5.02  TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 142302 (2018).
  113. J. Thaler and K. Van Tilburg, Maximizing boosted top identification by minimizing N-subjettiness, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2012) 093.
  114. M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, fastjet user manual, Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 1896 (2012).
  115. D. Bertolini, T. Chan, and J. Thaler, Jet observables without jet algorithms, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2014) 013.
  116. A. J. Larkoski, D. Neill, and J. Thaler, Jet shapes with the broadening axis, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2014) 017.
  117. G. P. Salam, Et∞ Scheme.
  118. CMS Collaboration, Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector, J. Instrum. 12, P10003 (2017).
  119. CMS Collaboration, Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV, J. Instrum. 13, P06015 (2018).
  120. CMS Collaboration, Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC, J. Instrum. 16, P05014 (2021).
  121. M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam, Pileup subtraction using jet areas, Phys. Lett. B 659, 119 (2008).
  122. CMS Collaboration, Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data, J. Instrum. 15, P09018 (2020).
  123. CMS Collaboration, Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-JME-16-003, CERN, 2017, https://inspirehep.net/literature/1519093.
  124. CMS Collaboration, Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV, J. Instrum. 13, P05011 (2018).
  125. L. Breiman, J. Friedman, R. A. Olshen, and C. J. Stone, Classification and Regression Trees (Chapman and Hall/CRC, London, 2017), 10.1201/9781315139470.
  126. Y. Freund and R. E. Schapire, A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting, J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 55, 119 (1997).
  127. A. Hoecker, P. Speckmayer, J. Stelzer, J. Therhaag, E. von Toerne, and H. Voss, TMVA: Toolkit for multivariate data analysis, Proc. Sci., ACAT2007 (2007) 040 [arXiv:physics/0703039].
  128. I. Chakravarti, R. Laha, and J. Roy, Handbook of Methods of Applied Statistics. Vol. 1, Techniques of Computation (Wiley, New York, 1967).
  129. G. Punzi, Sensitivity of searches for new signals, and its optimization, eConf C030908, MODT002 (2003), arXiv:physics/0308063.
  130. A. Ghosh, S. Ghosh, S. Mitra, T. Samui, and R. K. Singh, Numerical data for selected figures from “Improving sensitivity of vectorlike top partner searches with jet substructure”, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.18407474 (2026).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 113, 035034– Published 26 February, 2026
  • Received 24 October 2025
  • Accepted 23 January 2026
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