Paper detail

Signal-background interference for digluon resonances at the Large Hadron Collider

We study the interference between the amplitudes for $gg \rightarrow X \rightarrow gg$, where $X$ is a new heavy digluon resonance, and the QCD background $gg \rightarrow gg$, at the Large Hadron Collider. The interference produces a large low-mass tail and a deficit of events above the resonance mass, compared to the naive pure resonance peak. For a variety of different resonance quantum numbers and masses, we evaluate the signal-background interference contribution at leading order, including showering, hadronization, and detector effects. The resulting new physics dijet mass distribution may have a shape that appears, after QCD background fitting and subtraction, to resemble an enhanced peak, a shelf, a peak/dip, or even a pure dip. We argue that the true limits on new digluon resonances are likely to differ significantly from the limits obtained when interference is neglected, especially if the branching ratio to $gg$ is less than 1.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.