# Search for dark matter in association with a Higgs boson decaying to two photons at $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

M. Aaboud et al. *

(ATLAS Collaboration)

(Received 7 July 2017; published 8 December 2017)

A search for dark matter in association with a Higgs boson decaying to two photons is presented. This study is based on data collected with the ATLAS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb⁻¹ of proton-proton collisions at the LHC at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016. No significant excess over the expected background is observed. Upper limits at 95% confidence level are set on the visible cross section for beyond the Standard Model physics processes, and the production cross section times branching fraction of the Standard Model Higgs boson decaying into two photons in association with missing transverse momentum in three different benchmark models. Limits at 95% confidence level are also set on the observed signal in two-dimensional mass planes. Additionally, the results are interpreted in terms of 90% confidence-level limits on the dark-matter-nucleon scattering cross section, as a function of the dark-matter particle mass, for a spin-independent scenario.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.112004

## I. INTRODUCTION

The discovery of a particle consistent with the Standard Model (SM) Higgs boson in 2012 by the ATLAS [1] and CMS [2] collaborations has opened up new possibilities in searches for physics beyond the SM (BSM). Although strong astrophysical evidence [3,4] indicates the possible existence of dark matter (DM), there is no evidence yet for nongravitational interactions between DM and SM particles. The interaction probability of DM particles, which are produced in SM particle collisions, with a detector is expected to be tiny. Thus, many searches for DM at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) involve missing transverse momentum. Although the branching fraction of the SM Higgs boson decaying into a pair of photons is small, the diphoton system presented in this paper falls in a narrower mass range around the Higgs boson mass than in Ref. [11]. With the diphoton trigger, this channel is more sensitive in the low $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ region than the channel with the SM Higgs boson decaying into a pair of b-quarks, which relies on the high $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ trigger. This paper presents an updated search for DM particles ($\chi$) associated with the SM Higgs boson (h) decay to a pair of photons using 36.1 fb⁻¹ of pp collision data collected at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV during 2015 and 2016, where both the integrated luminosity and the center-of-mass energy are significantly higher than in the previously published ATLAS analysis [7].

20.3 fb⁻¹ of pp collision data at $\sqrt{s}$ = 8 TeV [7,8], and 2.3–36.1 fb⁻¹ of pp collision data at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV [9–11], considering the SM Higgs boson decay into a pair of photons or b-quarks in events with missing transverse momentum. Although the branching fraction of the SM Higgs boson decaying into a pair of photons is small, the diphoton system presented in this paper falls in a narrower mass range around the Higgs boson mass than in Ref. [11]. With the diphoton trigger, this channel is more sensitive in the low $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ region than the channel with the SM Higgs boson decaying into a pair of b-quarks, which relies on the high $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ trigger. This paper presents an updated search for DM particles ($\chi$) associated with the SM Higgs boson (h) decay to a pair of photons using 36.1 fb⁻¹ of pp collision data collected at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV during 2015 and 2016, where both the integrated luminosity and the center-of-mass energy are significantly higher than in the previously published ATLAS analysis [7].

Three benchmark models are considered in this analysis. The leading-order (LO) Feynman diagrams representing the production of h plus $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ in two simplified models [12] are shown in Figs. 1(a) and 1(b). In the first model, a massive vector mediator $Z'$ emits a Higgs boson and subsequently decays to a pair of Dirac fermionic DM candidates. A vector-boson mediator arises in many BSM theories through a minimal extension to the gauge sector of the SM. In scenarios where the DM couples to the SM only via the $Z'$ boson [i.e., the $Z'_B$ model [5] represented in Fig. 1(a)], the associated $U'(1)$ symmetry ensures the stability of the DM particle. The baryon number B is associated with the gauge symmetry of $U(1)_B$, and an additional scalar particle (referred to as a baryonic Higgs boson) is introduced to break this symmetry spontaneously

<footnote>*Full author list given at the end of the article.</footnote>

<footnote>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.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_1.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 1. The Feynman diagrams for the production of DM ($\chi$) in association with a SM Higgs boson (h) arising from three theoretical models considered in this paper: (a) $Z'_B$ model, (b) $Z'^{-2HDM}$ model, (c) heavy-scalar model.</figcaption></figure>

and generate the $Z'$ boson mass (denoted by $m_{Z'_B}$). The second model [from a $Z'$-two-Higgs doublet model ($Z'^{-2HDM}$) [13], Fig. 1(b)] involves the $Z'$ boson decaying to the SM Higgs boson and an intermediate heavy pseudoscalar boson $A^0$, which then decays to a pair of Dirac fermionic DM particles. The minimum decay widths of the mediators are assumed for both the $Z'_B$ and $Z'^{-2HDM}$ models to be the sum of the partial widths for all decays into DM and quarks that are kinematically accessible [12]. Alongside those simplified models recommended in Ref. [12], a third model [referred to as the heavy-scalar model [14], Fig. 1(c)] introduces a heavy scalar boson H produced primarily via gluon-gluon fusion (ggF) with a mass in the range $2m_h < m_H < 2m_{top}$, in which $m_h$ and $m_{top}$ represent the masses of the SM Higgs boson and top quark, respectively. The upper bound on $m_H$ is introduced to avoid a large branching fraction for $H \to t\bar{t}$, which would saturate the entire H width leading to a $H \to h\chi\chi$ branching fraction close to zero. The lower bound on $m_H$ is required to be more than twice of $m_h$ to ensure the SM Higgs boson is produced on shell. An effective quartic coupling between $h$, $H$, and $\chi$ is considered, where the DM $\chi$ is assumed to be a scalar particle. The decay branching fraction of H to $h$ and two $\chi$ particles is assumed to be 100% for this model, to simplify the interpretations. The DM mass ($m_\chi$) is taken to be roughly half of the SM Higgs-boson mass to ensure on-shell decay of $H \to h\chi\chi$, and to suppress invisible decay modes of $h$, as described in Ref. [15]. While no assumptions are made here as to the nature of H, it can be viewed as a part of a 2HDM + $\chi$ scenario where H may be considered as the CP-even heavy scalar boson [14].

This paper is organized as follows. Section II gives a brief description of the ATLAS detector. Section III describes the data set and the signal and background Monte Carlo (MC) simulation samples used. Section IV explains the event reconstruction, while Sec. V outlines the optimization of the event selection and categorization. Section VI summarizes the signal and background modeling. Section VII discusses the experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties that affect the results. Section VIII presents the results and their interpretations, and finally a summary of the results is given in Sec. IX.

## II. ATLAS DETECTOR

The ATLAS detector [16,17] is a multipurpose particle physics detector with approximately forward-backward symmetric cylindrical geometry.<fnref n="1" /> The inner detector (ID) tracking system covers $|\eta| < 2.5$ and consists of a silicon pixel detector, a silicon microstrip detector and a transition radiation tracker (TRT). The ID allows a precise reconstruction of charged-particle trajectories and of decay vertices of long-lived particles. The ID is surrounded by a thin superconducting solenoid providing a 2 T axial magnetic field. A high-granularity lead/liquid-argon (LAr) sampling calorimeter measures the energy and the position of electromagnetic showers in the central ($|\eta| < 1.475$) and endcap ($1.375 < |\eta| < 3.2$) regions. It includes a pre-sampler (for $|\eta| < 1.8$) and three sampling layers up to $|\eta| < 2.5$. The longitudinal and lateral segmentation of the calorimeter allows a measurement of the shower direction without assuming that the photon originates from a specific point along the beam line. LAr sampling calorimeters with copper and tungsten absorbers are also used to measure hadronic showers in the endcap ($1.5 < |\eta| < 3.2$) and forward ($3.1 < |\eta| < 4.9$) regions, while a steel/scintillator-tile calorimeter measures hadronic showers in the central region ($|\eta| < 1.7$). The muon spectrometer surrounds the calorimeters and consists of three large superconducting air-core toroid magnets, each with eight coils, a system of precision tracking chambers ($|\eta| < 2.7$), and fast tracking chambers for triggering ($|\eta| < 2.4$). Reconstructed events are selected by a two-level trigger system. The first-level trigger is hardware based, while the second-level trigger is implemented in software [18].

<footnote n="1">¹ATLAS uses a right-handed coordinate system with its origin at the nominal interaction point (IP) in the center of the detector and the z axis along the beam pipe. The x axis points from the IP to the center of the LHC ring, and the y axis points upward. Cylindrical coordinates (r, φ) are used in the transverse plane, φ being the azimuthal angle around the beam pipe. The pseudorapidity is defined in terms of the polar angle θ as $\eta = -\ln[\tan(\theta/2)]$. The photon transverse energy is $E_T = E/\cosh(\eta)$, where E is its energy.</footnote>
### III. DATA AND SIMULATION SAMPLES

The analysis uses pp collision data with a bunch crossing interval of 25 ns, collected in 2015 and 2016 at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. Only events that were recorded in stable-beam conditions, when relevant detector components were functioning properly, are considered. Events were collected using a diphoton trigger requiring two reconstructed photon candidates with transverse energies ($E_T$) of at least 35 and 25 GeV for the $E_T$-ordered leading and subleading photons, respectively. The trigger efficiency with respect to the offline-reconstructed photons, measured using the same method as described in Ref. [19], is 99%. The data sample corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$. There are on average 25 interactions in the same bunch crossing (in-time pileup) in this data sample.

The MC simulation of signal and background processes is used to optimize the selection criteria, estimate uncertainties, and study the shapes of the signal and background diphoton invariant mass ($m_{\gamma\gamma}$) distributions. Signal events from $Z'_B$, $Z'$-2HDM, and the heavy-scalar models are generated using MADGRAPH_AMC@NLO 2.2.3 [20] at LO in quantum chromodynamics (QCD) using the NNPDF3.0LO [21] parton distribution function (PDF) set. Parton showering and hadronization are handled by the PYTHIA 8.186 [22] event generator with the A14 [23] set of tuned parameters (tune), using the NNPDF2.3LO PDF set [24]. MC samples for the $Z'_B$ model are generated assuming a DM mass $m_\chi$ between 1 and 1000 GeV and a range of mediator masses $m_{Z'_B}$ between 1 and 2000 GeV. The upper bounds of the DM and mediator masses are motivated by the limited sensitivity with the current integrated luminosity, though in principle even heavier signals can be probed with this analysis. The values of the coupling constants and mixing parameter are chosen following the recommendations of the LHC dark matter forum [12]. The couplings of the $Z'$ boson to DM particles ($g_\chi$), to quarks ($g_q$) and to the SM Higgs boson ($g_{hZ'Z'}/m_{Z'}$) are set to 1.0, 1/3, and 1.0, respectively. The mixing angle between the baryonic Higgs boson and the SM Higgs boson is set to $\sin\theta = 0.3$. The kinematic distributions predicted by the model are not strongly dependent on the coupling parameters after similar cuts either at the particle level or at the reconstruction level, and thus all samples are generated using this set of parameters. Similarly, the MC samples for the $Z'$-2HDM model are generated for ranges of values of the mediator mass $m_{Z'} = 400$ to 1400 GeV and pseudoscalar boson mass $m_{A^0} = 200$ to 450 GeV for which the search is sensitive. The masses of the neutral CP-even scalar ($H^0$) and the charged scalars ($H^\pm$) from $Z'$-2HDM model are set to 300 GeV. The DM mass $m_\chi$ is set to 100 GeV, the ratio of the two-Higgs-doublet vacuum expectation values is set to $\tan\beta = 1.0$ and the coupling constant between the $Z'$, Higgs, and pseudoscalar bosons is set to $g_{Z'} = 0.8$, as suggested by Ref. [12]. The kinematics

do not change appreciably when different values of $\tan\beta$ and $g_{Z'}$ are used. Moreover, in the signal process, as the DM pairs are produced as a result of the $A^0$ decay, there are minimal kinematic changes when the $A^0$ is produced on-shell. For the heavy-scalar model, the events are generated with $m_H$ in steps of 10 GeV in the intervals $260 \le m_H \le 270$ GeV and $300 \le m_H \le 350$ GeV and in steps of 5 GeV in the intervals $270 \le m_H \le 300$ GeV for $m_\chi = 60$ GeV. This mass value ($m_\chi = 60$ GeV) was chosen in order to ensure on-shell decay of $H \to h\chi\chi$, and at the same time to suppress invisible decay modes of $h$. The impact of this choice on the expected sensitivity is negligible for $\chi$ mass from 50 to 70 GeV. The mass point $m_H = 275$ GeV and $m_\chi = 60$ GeV is taken as an example of the kinematics that depend on the value of $m_H$ in this model.

The dominant backgrounds are resonant SM $h \to \gamma\gamma$, and nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma + \text{jet}$, $W\gamma$, $Z\gamma$, $W\gamma\gamma$, and $Z\gamma\gamma$ production. For the resonant SM Higgs-boson production, events from $Wh$ and $Zh$ processes are generated by PYTHIA 8.186 with the A14 tune and the NNPDF2.3LO PDF set. The ggF and vector-boson fusion (VBF) samples are generated by POWHEG-BOX 2 [25–28] interfaced to PYTHIA 8.186 with the AZNLO [29] tune and the CT10 PDF set [30]. Samples of $t\bar{t}h$ events are generated with MADGRAPH_AMC@NLO 2.2.3 [20] interfaced to PYTHIA 8.186 with the NNPDF3.0LO [21] PDF set. Samples of $b\bar{b}h$ events are generated by MADGRAPH_AMC@NLO 2.2.3 interfaced to PYTHIA 8.186 with the A14 tune and the NNPDF2.3LO PDF set. The nonresonant diphoton processes with associated jets are generated using SHERPA 2.1.1 [31] with the CT10 PDF set. Matrix elements are calculated with up to three partons at LO and merged with the SHERPA 2.1.1 parton shower [32] using the ME+PS@LO prescription [33]. The CT10 PDF set is used in conjunction with a dedicated parton-shower tuning developed by the SHERPA 2.1.1 authors. The $W\gamma$, $Z\gamma$, $W\gamma\gamma$, $Z\gamma\gamma$ samples are generated using SHERPA 2.1.1 with the CT10 PDF set.

The normalization of nonresonant backgrounds is obtained directly from data, as described in Sec. VI. The cross sections [34] of the SM Higgs-boson processes are calculated at next-to-leading order (NLO) in electro-weak theory and next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) in QCD for VBF, $Zh$ and $Wh$ samples and next-to-next-to-next-to-leading order plus next-to-next-to-leading logarithm (N$^3$LO + NNLL) in QCD for the ggF sample. The SM Higgs-boson mass is set to 125.09 GeV [35] and its branching fraction decaying into two photons is 0.227% [34]. Samples for the $Z'_B$ and $Z'$-2HDM models are normalized using the LO cross sections predicted by MADGRAPH_AMC@NLO 2.2.3. Samples for the heavy-scalar model are normalized using the cross section of a SM Higgs boson produced in ggF at the same mass at NNLO + NNLL in QCD.

Different pileup conditions from same and neighboring bunch crossings as a function of the instantaneous luminosity
are simulated by overlaying minimum-bias events generated with PYTHIA 8.186 and EVTGEN [36] with the MSTW2008LO PDF set and the A2 [37] tune on the events of all hard processes. Differences between the simulated and observed distributions of the number of interactions per bunch crossing are removed by applying pileup weights to simulated events. Detector effects are simulated using a full simulation [38] performed using GEANT4 [39] for signals, SM Higgs processes, and $Wγ$, $Zγ$, $Wγγ$, and $Zγγ$ backgrounds. The diphoton continuum background and some of the signal samples are simulated using a fast simulation based on ATLFASTII [38].

## IV. EVENT RECONSTRUCTION

In each event, the observed final state is reconstructed from photons, leptons, jets, and $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ that are built combining the related measurements provided by the various subdetectors of the experiment.

Photons are reconstructed from clusters of energy deposits in the electromagnetic calorimeter measured in projective towers. Clusters without matching tracks are classified as unconverted photon candidates. A photon is considered as a converted photon candidate if it is matched to a pair of tracks that pass a TRT-hits requirement [40] and that form a vertex in the ID which is consistent with originating from a massless particle, or if it is matched to a single track passing a TRT-hits requirement and having a first hit after the innermost layer of the pixel detector. The photon energy is calibrated using a multivariate regression algorithm trained with fully reconstructed MC samples and then corrections based on *in situ* techniques on data, as explained in Ref. [41]. The overall energy scale in data, as well as the difference in the constant term of the energy resolution between data and simulation, are estimated with a sample of Z boson decays to electrons recorded in 2015 and 2016. The photon direction is estimated either using electromagnetic (EM) calorimeter longitudinal segmentation (if unconverted) or conversion vertex position (if converted), together with constraints from the pp collision point.

A “tight” photon identification requirement [40] is applied to reduce the misidentification of hadronic jets containing a high-$p_T$ neutral hadron (e.g. $\pi^0$) decaying to two photons. The photon identification is based on the lateral profile of the energy deposits in the first and second layers of the electromagnetic calorimeter, and on the shower leakage fraction in the hadronic calorimeter. The selection requirements are tuned separately for unconverted and converted photon candidates. The identification efficiency of unconverted (converted) photons range from 85% to 95% (90% to 98%) between 25 and 200 GeV [42]. Corrections are applied to the electromagnetic shower-shape variables for simulated photons, to account for small differences observed between data and simulation. The diphoton mass resolution at $m_{\gamma\gamma} = 125$ GeV is in the range 1.32–1.86 GeV [43].

To further reject hadronic backgrounds, requirements on two photon isolation variables are applied. The first variable, $E_T^{\text{iso}}$, is the sum of the transverse energies deposited in topological clusters [44] of cells in the calorimeter within a cone of size $\Delta R \equiv \sqrt{(\Delta\eta)^2 + (\Delta\phi)^2} = 0.2$ around each photon. The photon cluster energy and an estimate of the energy deposited by the photon outside its associated cluster are subtracted from that sum. To reduce the effects from the underlying event and pileup, the median ambient energy computed from low-$p_T$ jets in the event [45,46] is subtracted from $E_T^{\text{iso}}$. Good candidates are required to have an $E_T^{\text{iso}}$ less than 6.5% of the photon transverse energy. The second variable is a track-based isolation, defined as the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all tracks with $p_T > 1$ GeV and consistent with originating from the primary vertex (PV) within a cone of size $\Delta R = 0.2$ around each photon. In the case of converted photon candidates, the tracks associated with the conversion are removed. Good candidates are required to have a track isolation less than 5% of the photon transverse energy. The isolation efficiency for photons, which is mostly independent of their kinematic variables, is about 90% for the ggF SM Higgs boson process.

Selected events contain at least one PV formed from two or more tracks, each with $p_T > 400$ MeV. In each event, the diphoton PV is chosen from the PV candidates using a neural network. The input variables to this neural network are the combined z-position of the intersections of the extrapolated photon trajectories with the beam axis; the sum of the squared transverse momenta $\sum p_T^2$ and the scalar sum of the transverse momenta $\sum p_T$ of the tracks associated with each reconstructed vertex; and the difference in azimuthal angle $\Delta\phi$ between the direction defined by the vector sum of the momenta of tracks from each vertex and that of the diphoton system. Dedicated studies of $Z \to e^+e^-$ are performed in order to validate the diphoton vertex identification efficiency (correct identification of the hard process vertex by the neural network) between data and simulation. The method is similar to the one used in Ref. [47]. Studies show good agreement in diphoton vertex identification efficiency between data and simulation. The efficiency to locate the diphoton PV within 0.3 mm of the production vertex is 81% for SM Higgs boson production via ggF, 82% for a heavy-scalar signal with $m_H = 275$ GeV and scalar DM $m_\chi = 60$ GeV, 67% for a $Z'_B$ signal with $m_{Z'_B} = 200$ GeV and Dirac fermion DM $m_\chi = 1$ GeV, and 69% for a $Z'$-2HDM signal with $m_{Z'} = 1000$ GeV, $m_{A^0} = 200$ GeV and Dirac fermion DM $m_\chi = 100$ GeV.

Electrons are reconstructed from energy deposits measured in the EM calorimeter which are matched to ID tracks [48]. They are required to satisfy $|\eta| < 2.47$, excluding the EM calorimeter transition region $1.37 < |\eta| < 1.52$, and to have $p_T > 10$ GeV. The electrons are identified using a likelihood-based algorithm that uses the track and shower-shape variables as input. The “medium” criteria are applied, providing an identification efficiency varying from 85% to 95% as a function of $E_T$ [49]. Loose calorimeter and track
isolation requirements are applied to electrons. Pileup and the underlying event contributions in the calorimeter isolation are estimated using the ambient energy from low-$p_T$ jets and are corrected on an event-by-event basis. In the inclusive diphoton sample the combined efficiency of the isolation requirements is 98% [50].

Muons are reconstructed from high-quality track segments in the muon spectrometer. In the region $|\eta| < 2.5$, they must be matched to ID tracks. They are required to have $p_T > 10$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.7$ [51]. The muon "medium" criteria are applied and the identification efficiency is 96% [52]. The muon candidates must also satisfy calorimeter and track isolation criteria. The ambient energy from low-$p_T$ jets is used to correct the contributions from pileup and the underlying event. The combined isolation efficiency varies from 95% to 99% as a function of $p_T$ from 25 GeV to 60 GeV [52].

The significance of the track's transverse impact parameter with respect to the diphoton primary vertex, $|d_0|/\sigma_{d_0}$, is required to be less than 5.0 for electrons and 3.0 for muons. The longitudinal impact parameter $z_0$ must satisfy $|z_0| \sin\theta < 0.5$ mm for electrons and muons.

Jets are reconstructed from three-dimensional topological clusters using the anti-$k_t$ algorithm [53] with a radius parameter of $R = 0.4$. The jets are required to have $p_T > 20$ GeV and $|\eta| < 4.5$ for the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ calculation and $p_T > 25$ GeV and $|\eta| < 4.4$ for the event selection. The jets with $|\eta| < 2.4$ and $p_T < 60$ GeV must pass the jet vertex tagger selection [54], in which a jet is identified as originating from the diphoton primary vertex by examining the likelihood value calculated from the track information. In addition, quality criteria are applied to the jets, and events with jets consistent with noise in the calorimeter or non-collision backgrounds are vetoed [55].

The missing transverse momentum is calculated as the magnitude of the negative vectorial sum of the transverse momenta of calibrated photons, electrons, muons, and jets associated with the diphoton primary vertex. The transverse momenta of all tracks that originate from the diphoton primary vertex but are not already used in the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ calculation are summed and taken into account in the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ calculation. This term is defined as the track-based soft term [56,57]. Clusters and tracks not associated with the diphoton primary vertex are not included in the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ calculation, significantly suppressing the pileup effect and thus improving the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ resolution.

## V. EVENT SELECTION

Events are required to have at least two photon candidates with $p_T > 25$ GeV and within a fiducial region of the EM calorimeter defined by $|\eta| < 2.37$, excluding the region of $1.37 < |\eta| < 1.52$. Photon candidates in this fiducial region are ordered according to their $E_T$ and only the first two are considered: the leading and subleading photon

candidates must have $E_T^{\gamma}/m_{\gamma\gamma} > 0.35$ and $0.25$, respectively, where $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ is the invariant mass of the two selected photons. Events are required to have $105 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 160$ GeV where the diphoton mass is calculated assuming that the photons originate from the diphoton primary vertex.

In the $Z'_B$ and $Z'_2$HDM models of DM production, the Higgs boson recoils against the DM pair, resulting in large $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ in the event and large $p_T$ of the diphoton candidate, denoted as $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$. By contrast, in the heavy-scalar model, the spectra of $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ and $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$ are typically shifted to smaller values. Consequently, the classification of the selected events into categories depending on $E_T^{\text{miss}}$, $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$ and other kinematic quantities leads to an increase in the overall sensitivity of the analysis to these different signal models.

The background events that survive the high-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ requirement but are not expected to present any genuine $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ mostly have one or several high-$p_T$ pileup jets. The misidentification of these jets therefore leads to large $E_T^{\text{miss}}$. These pileup jets usually originate from a pileup vertex with larger $\Sigma p_T^2$ than the diphoton primary vertex, where $p_T$ is the track transverse momentum associated with a single vertex. Requiring the diphoton primary vertex to be the vertex with the largest $\Sigma p_T^2$ in each event helps to suppress pileup effects and reject a large fraction of the fake $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ events. Models for which ggF is the main production mode typically pass this selection, since for example the heavy scalar produced in ggF is often accompanied by radiated jets, leading to a large $\Sigma p_T^2$ of the vertex. An additional variable, $p_T^{\text{hard}}$, defined as the magnitude of the vectorial sum of the transverse momenta photons and jets in the event, provides further discrimination against events with fake $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ in the low-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ region. To further reject the background events from SM $V\gamma$ and $V\gamma\gamma$ production (where V stands for W or Z), which contribute significantly in the high-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ region, a lepton (electron or muon) veto is applied.

The selected events are thus divided into five categories based on the following:

(i) the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ significance, $S_{E_T^{\text{miss}}} = E_T^{\text{miss}} / \sqrt{\sum E_T}$, where the total transverse energy $\sum E_T$ is calculated from the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of

<table><caption>TABLE I. Optimized criteria used in the categorization. The categories are defined sequentially in the rows and each category excludes events in the previous row.</caption><thead><tr><th>Category</th><th>Requirements</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Mono-Higgs</td><td>$S_{E_T^{\text{miss}}} > 7\sqrt{\text{GeV}}, p_T^{\gamma\gamma} > 90\text{GeV}, \text{lepton veto}$</td></tr><tr><td>High-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$</td><td>$S_{E_T^{\text{miss}}} > 5.5\sqrt{\text{GeV}}, \text{PV}^{\text{highest}} = \text{PV}^{\gamma\gamma}$</td></tr><tr><td>Intermediate-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$</td><td>$S_{E_T^{\text{miss}}} > 4\sqrt{\text{GeV}}, p_T^{\text{hard}} > 40\text{GeV}, \text{PV}^{\text{highest}} = \text{PV}^{\gamma\gamma}$</td></tr><tr><td>Different-Vertex</td><td>$S_{E_T^{\text{miss}}} > 4\sqrt{\text{GeV}}, p_T^{\text{hard}} > 40\text{GeV}, \text{PV}^{\text{highest}} \neq \text{PV}^{\gamma\gamma}$</td></tr><tr><td>Rest</td><td>$p_T^{\gamma\gamma} > 15\text{GeV}$</td></tr></tbody></table>
the calibrated photons, electrons, muons and jets used in the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ calculation described in Sec. IV, as well as the tracks not associated with these but the PV;

(ii) the diphoton transverse momentum, $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$;

(iii) $p_T^{\text{hard}}$;

(iv) the number of leptons in the event;

(v) the diphoton vertex is the highest $\sum p_T^2$ vertex.

The resulting categorization scheme is shown in Table I. The categories are defined sequentially in the rows and each category excludes events in the previous row. The $Z'_B$ and $Z'$-2HDM signal samples are used to optimize the definition of the Mono-Higgs category, which provides most of the sensitivity to those two models. The other four categories, which provide extra

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 2. The distribution of (a) $S_{E_T^{\text{miss}}}$, (b) $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$, and (c) $p_T^{\text{hard}}$ after the selection of diphoton candidates in $120 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 130$ GeV. Expected distributions are shown for a $Z'_B$ signal with $m_{Z'_B} = 200$ GeV and Dirac fermion DM $m_\chi = 1$ GeV; a $Z'$-2HDM signal with $m_{Z'} = 1000$ GeV, $m_{A^0} = 200$ GeV and Dirac fermion DM $m_\chi = 100$ GeV; and a heavy-scalar model with $m_H = 275$ GeV and scalar DM $m_\chi = 60$ GeV. These overlaid signal points are representative of the model kinematics. Only the quadratic sum of the MC statistical and experimental systematic uncertainties in the total background is shown as the hatched bands, while the theoretical uncertainties in the background normalization are not included. Overflow events are included in the rightmost bin. The asymmetric error bars on data points come from Poissonian confidence intervals at 68% confidence level.</figcaption></figure>
sensitivity to heavy scalar boson events with softer $E_T^{\text{miss}}$, are optimized using simulated heavy scalar boson samples to cover the different kinematic regimes of the heavy-scalar model.

Figure 2 shows the distributions of $S_{E^{\text{miss}}}$, $p_T^{\text{hard}}$, and $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$ after the selection of diphoton candidates in $120 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 130$ GeV. These distributions illustrate three kinds of signals in different $S_{E^{\text{miss}}}$ regimes, and the contributions from the different background processes. Expected distributions are shown for a $Z'_B$ signal with $m_{Z'_B} = 200$ GeV and Dirac fermion DM $m_\chi = 1$ GeV, a $Z'_B$2HDM signal with $m_{Z'_B} = 1000$ GeV, $m_{A^0} = 200$ GeV and Dirac fermion DM $m_\chi = 100$ GeV, and a heavy-scalar model with $m_H = 275$ GeV and scalar DM $m_\chi = 60$ GeV. These overlaid signal points are representative of the model kinematics.

For the distributions shown in Fig. 2, the simulation is used to determine the shapes and normalizations of the $V\gamma$ and $V\gamma\gamma$ contributions, as well as the shape of the $\gamma\gamma$ contribution, respectively. The normalizations of the $\gamma\gamma$ and $\gamma + \text{jet}$ contributions are fixed to 79% and 19% of the data yield, where these fractions are estimated from a two-dimensional sideband technique by counting the number of events in which one or both photons pass or fail the identification or isolation requirements [58]. The shape of the $\gamma + \text{jet}$ contribution is determined from a data control region where one photon fails to satisfy the photon identification criteria, after subtracting the contamination expected from $\gamma\gamma$, $V\gamma$ and $V\gamma\gamma$.

The slight discrepancies observed in the distributions of $S_{E^{\text{miss}}}$, $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$, and $p_T^{\text{hard}}$ in Fig. 2 do not affect the results. Discrepancies are found mainly in nonresonant backgrounds, which are estimated directly from data, as explained in Sec. VI.

## VI. SIGNAL AND BACKGROUND PARAMETRIZATION

The signal and backgrounds are extracted by fitting analytic functions to the diphoton invariant mass distribution in each category. For the signal and the SM Higgs-boson background, the expected normalizations are obtained from their theoretical cross sections multiplied by the product of the acceptance times efficiency from the simulation. The shapes are modeled with a double-sided crystal ball function (as defined in Ref. [43]). The shape parameters are determined by fitting the diphoton mass distribution in simulation for each category.

Both the normalization and the shape of the nonresonant background are obtained by fitting the diphoton invariant mass distribution in data for each category. A variety of analytic functions are considered for the nonresonant background parametrization: exponential functions of different-order polynomials, Bernstein polynomials of different order, and an adapted dijet

function [59]. The potential bias associated with the choice of a specific analytic function to model the continuum background (referred to as the nonresonant background modeling uncertainty, $\Delta N_{\text{bkg}}^{\text{nonres}}$) is estimated for each category as the signal event yield extracted from a signal-plus-background maximum-likelihood fit to a background-only diphoton invariant mass distribution with small statistical fluctuations [43]. The background-only distribution is obtained by mixing simulated $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma + \text{jet}$, $V\gamma$, and $V\gamma\gamma$ processes. The samples of $V\gamma$ and $V\gamma\gamma$ are weighted according to their theoretical cross section while $\gamma\gamma$ and $\gamma + \text{jet}$ samples are normalized to the number of candidates in data in the mass window $105 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 160$ GeV scaled by the fraction of each sample (79% for $\gamma\gamma$ and 19% for $\gamma + \text{jet}$). For a given functional form, several fits are tested by varying the position of the signal peak between 115 and 135 GeV. The largest number of signal events obtained in these fits to the background-only templates is taken as $\Delta N_{\text{bkg}}^{\text{nonres}}$. Among the different analytic functions that were tested, the parametrization with the smallest $\Delta N_{\text{bkg}}^{\text{nonres}}$, or the minimum number of free parameters when the same $\Delta N_{\text{bkg}}^{\text{nonres}}$ values are obtained, is selected as the nominal background parametrization to describe the nonresonant background shape. In addition, a $\chi^2$ test is performed to ensure that the fit is compatible with the data in each category.

The sidebands ($105 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 120$ GeV and $130 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 160$ GeV) of data and the simulated events are compared with each other. Due to the low statistics in the Mono-Higgs category, the potential discrepancies between data and the simulated events are obscured by the statistical uncertainties. A visible discrepancy is only observed in the high-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$, intermediate-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$, different-vertex, and rest categories with large data statistics and in these cases a data-driven reweighting is applied to the simulated events to correct the shape. In order to check whether there is a substantial improvement in $\chi^2$ between two nested functions, several F tests [19] are performed in the data sidebands of the Mono-Higgs category where the simple exponential function is chosen. The F tests are performed by comparing the simple exponential function to other higher-order functions. A test statistic F is calculated by using the resulting values of $\chi^2$, and its probability is compared with that expected from a Fisher distribution with the corresponding number of degrees of freedom. The hypothesis that a higher-order function is not needed is rejected if the F-test probability is less than 5%. The tests show that the higher-order functions do not provide a significantly better fit and the lower-order function is sufficient. The selected analytic function along with its nonresonant background modeling uncertainty in each category, which is taken as an estimate of the systematic uncertainty due to the choice of parametrization, is shown in Table II.
<table><caption>TABLE II. The analytic functions used to model the nonresonant $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution, the uncertainty in the signal due to the nonresonant background modeling ($\Delta N_{\text{bkg}}^{\text{nonres}}$) and the relative uncertainties in the expected nonresonant background and signal per category. The relative uncertainty in the signal is evaluated in the Mono-Higgs category by using the $Z'_B$ yields and in the other categories by using the heavy-scalar yields as $N_{\text{signal}}$ from Table IV. The signal yields are calculated in the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ range between 120 and 130 GeV. The variable $x$ is defined as $m_{\gamma\gamma}/\sqrt{s}$ while $a$ and $b$ are parameters of the background functions. For the rest category, $C_3^j$ are binomial coefficients and $b_{j,3}$ are Bernstein coefficients.</caption><thead><tr><th>Category</th><th>Function</th><th>ΔN<sub>bkg</sub><sup>nonres</sup></th><th>ΔN<sub>bkg</sub><sup>nonres</sup>/N<sub>bkg</sub><sup>nonres</sup> [%]</th><th>ΔN<sub>bkg</sub><sup>nonres</sup>/N<sub>signal</sub> [%]</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Mono-Higgs</td><td>exp(a · x)</td><td>1.2</td><td>9.8</td><td>6.0</td></tr><tr><td>High-E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup></td><td>(1 - x<sup>1/3</sup>)<sup>b</sup> · x<sup>a</sup></td><td>2.7</td><td>4.0</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Intermediate-E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup></td><td>exp(a · x + b · x<sup>2</sup>)</td><td>5.8</td><td>1.3</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Different-vertex</td><td>exp(a · x + b · x<sup>2</sup>)</td><td>8.4</td><td>0.5</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Rest</td><td>Σ<sub>j=0</sub><sup>3</sup> C<sub>3</sub><sup>j</sup>x<sup>j</sup>(1 - x)<sup>3-j</sup>b<sub>j,3</sub></td><td>61</td><td>&lt; 0.1</td><td>28</td></tr></tbody></table>

## VII. SYSTEMATIC UNCERTAINTIES

Uncertainties from experimental and theoretical sources affect the signal efficiency and the SM Higgs-boson background yield estimated from the simulated MC samples. The nonresonant background is obtained directly from the fit to the data. The only systematic uncertainty in the nonresonant background is the potential bias $\Delta N_{\text{bkg}}^{\text{nonres}}$. A summary of the experimental and theoretical uncertainties with respect to the yield of the background from SM Higgs-boson processes, nonresonant background, and signal production is shown in Table III.

The uncertainty in the combined 2015 and 2016 integrated luminosity is 3.2%. It is derived, following a

methodology similar to that detailed in Ref. [60], from a calibration of the luminosity scale using x-y beam-separation scans performed in August 2015 and May 2016.

The efficiency of the diphoton trigger used to select events is evaluated in MC simulation using a trigger matching technique and in data using a bootstrap method [18]. In the diphoton invariant mass window of $105 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 160$ GeV, the trigger efficiency uncertainty is found to be 0.4%.

The uncertainty in the vertex selection efficiency is assessed by comparing the efficiency of finding photon-pointing vertices in $Z \to e^+e^-$ events in data and MC simulation [19], for which each electron track is removed

<table><caption>TABLE III. Breakdown of the dominant systematic uncertainties in the range of $105 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 160$ GeV. The uncertainties in the yield of signals, the background from SM Higgs-boson processes, and nonresonant background are shown. All production modes of the SM Higgs boson are considered together. Values for the impact on all categories are shown, unless one of the systematic uncertainties is not applicable to the sample, in which case the value is substituted by a “...”. If a given source has a different impact on the various categories, the given range corresponds to the smallest and largest impacts among categories or among the different signal models used in the analysis. In addition, the potential bias coming from nonresonant background mismodeling is shown relative to the background.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Source</th><th rowspan="2">Signals [%]</th><th colspan="2">Backgrounds [%]</th></tr><tr><th>SM Higgs boson</th><th>Non-resonant background</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Experimental</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Luminosity</td><td>3.2</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Trigger efficiency</td><td>0.4</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Vertex selection</td><td>&lt; 0.1</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Photon energy scale</td><td>0.1–2.0</td><td>0.1–1.4</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>Photon energy resolution</td><td>0.1–0.2</td><td>0.1–1.1</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>Photon identification efficiency</td><td>2.9–4.3</td><td>1.9–3.8</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>Photon isolation efficiency</td><td>1.2</td><td>0.8–1.6</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> reconstruction (diphoton vertex)</td><td>&lt; 0.1</td><td>0.5–1.9</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> reconstruction (jets, soft term)</td><td>1.0–1.4</td><td>0.8–23</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>Diphoton vertex with largest Σp<sub>T</sub><sup>2</sup></td><td>&lt; 0.1–1.9</td><td>&lt; 0.1–6.0</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>Pileup reweighting</td><td>0.2–5.6</td><td>0.7–11</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>Non-resonant background modeling</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>0.1–9.8</td></tr><tr><td>Theoretical</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Factorization and renormalization scale</td><td>0.6–11</td><td>2.5–6.0</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>PDF + α<sub>S</sub></td><td>11–25</td><td>1.2–2.9</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>Multiple parton-parton interactions</td><td>&lt; 1</td><td>0.4–5.8</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>B(H → γγ)</td><td>1.73</td><td></td><td>...</td></tr></tbody></table>
and its cluster is recalibrated as a photon cluster. The efficiency of this selection in data is found to be in agreement with the simulation within 0.01%.

The systematic uncertainties due to the photon energy scale and resolution are adapted from run-1 results [41], with minor updates in case of data-driven corrections using the run-2 data. The uncertainty in the energy scale is less than 1% in the $p_T$ range of the photons used in this analysis; the uncertainty in the energy resolution is smaller than 2%.

Uncertainties in photon identification and isolation efficiencies are estimated, and their impact on the number of events in each category is quantified. The uncertainty in the photon identification efficiency [42] is calculated from the difference between applying and not applying the corrections to the electromagnetic-shower-shape variables in simulation. The resulting uncertainty in the photon identification efficiency is lower than 3.8% for SM Higgs background in all categories, 2.9% for simplified model samples, and 4.3% for the heavy-scalar model. The uncertainty in the photon calorimeter isolation efficiency is calculated from efficiency differences between applying and not applying corrections derived from inclusive photon events to the isolation variables in simulation. The measurements of the efficiency correction factors using inclusive photon events are used to derive the efficiency uncertainty in the photon track isolation uncertainty. The photon isolation efficiency uncertainty is found to be smaller than 1.6% for the SM Higgs background and 1.2% for all signal samples.

Migration of events among categories occurs owing to changes in the energy of identified particles and jets, mostly due to the misreconstruction of jets and $E_T^{\text{miss}}$. The uncertainties in jet energy scale, resolution, and jet vertex tagger are propagated to the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ calculation. In addition, the uncertainties in the scale and resolution of the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ soft term are estimated in 2016 data using the method described in Ref. [61]. The overall jet and $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ uncertainties in the SM Higgs-boson processes are 6, 8, 23, 22, and 1% for the Mono-Higgs, high-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$, intermediate-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$, different-vertex, and rest categories, respectively. For signal processes, the overall jet and $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ uncertainties range from 1.0% to 1.4%. The choice of the diphoton vertex also affects the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ reconstruction. It introduces an additional uncertainty derived from the data-to-MC comparison in $Z \to e^+e^-$ events. This systematic uncertainty affects the processes with no genuine $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ and is estimated in each category. For the SM Higgs-boson production, it is found to be 0.5% in the Mono-Higgs category and up to 1.9% in the other categories. It is less than 0.1% for signal processes. Requiring the diphoton primary vertex to be the vertex with the largest $\Sigma p_T^2$ in the event introduces an uncertainty of about 6% in the SM Higgs-boson production in the high-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ and the intermediate-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ categories and 1.8% in the heavy-scalar signals in those categories. This systematic uncertainty differs between the signal and background

because there is a correlation between the $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ and the pileup vertex $\Sigma p_T^2$ for different processes. For other signal samples, these uncertainties are at most a few percent in any category. The pileup reweighting uncertainty is taken into account by propagating it through the event selection, and results in a 0.2%–5.6% uncertainty in the event yield of the signal and SM Higgs-boson samples.

The nonresonant background contribution is not affected by the same systematic uncertainties that characterize the MC simulation, since it is extracted from the data. The potential bias is added as a systematic uncertainty to account for the possible impact on the fitted signal yields of nonresonant background mismodeling. It is the leading systematic uncertainty of the analysis but is only one-third as large as the statistical uncertainty. The ratio of the potential bias in the signal yield to the expected nonresonant background ($\Delta N_{\text{bkg}}^{\text{nonres}}/N_{\text{bkg}}^{\text{nonres}}$) in the range $120 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 130$ GeV is 9.8% in the Mono-Higgs category, 4.0% in the high-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ category, 1.3% in the intermediate-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ category, 0.5% in the different-vertex category, and 0.1% in the rest category.

The predicted cross sections of the SM Higgs-boson and signal processes are affected by uncertainties due to missing higher-order terms in perturbative QCD. These uncertainties are estimated by varying the factorization and renormalization scales up and down from their nominal values by a factor of 2, recalculating the cross section in each case, and taking the largest deviation from the nominal cross section as the uncertainty. The uncertainty related to the renormalization and factorization scales is 0.6%–11% for signal and 2.5%–6.0% for the SM Higgs-boson processes [34]. For the three signal processes, the effect of PDF + $\alpha_S$ uncertainties including acceptance and normalization is 11%–25%. It is estimated using the recommendations of PDF4LHC [34]. Both intra-PDF and inter-PDF uncertainties are extracted. Intra-PDF uncertainties are obtained by varying the parameters of the NNPDF3.0LO PDF set, while inter-PDF uncertainties are estimated using alternative PDF sets (CT14 [62] at LO and MMHT2014 [63] at LO). The final inter-PDF uncertainty is the maximum deviation among all the variations from the central value obtained using the NNPDF3.0LO PDF set. In the case of the SM Higgs-boson processes, the effect of $\alpha_S$ and the choice of PDFs range from 2% to 6%, which are taken from Ref. [34]. The uncertainty in the branching fraction (B) of $h \to \gamma\gamma$ is 1.73% [34]. The uncertainty in the multiple parton-parton interactions is estimated by switching them on and off in PYTHIA 8.186 in the production of the ggF SM Higgs-boson sample. The resulting uncertainty in the number of events in this sample conservatively reaches 0.4% in the rest category, 5.8% in the different-vertex category, 3.8% intermediate-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ and different-vertex category, 3.4% in the high-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ category, and 1.4% in the Mono-Higgs category.
VIII. RESULTS

The results for the analysis are derived from a likelihood fit of the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the range $105 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 160$ GeV. The SM Higgs boson mass is set to 125.09 GeV [35]. The impact due to the SM Higgs-boson mass uncertainty is negligible. The signal strength, the background shape parameters, and the nuisance parameters representing the systematic uncertainties are set to be free parameters. The SM Higgs yields are taken from the SM predictions. The systematic uncertainty of each nuisance parameter is taken into account by multiplying the likelihood by a Gaussian penalty function centered on the nominal value of this parameter with a width set to its uncertainty. The nominal value of each SM Higgs-boson background nuisance parameter (including its yield) is taken from the simulation normalized to the SM theoretical predictions. Since adding all the other categories to the Mono-Higgs category only brings a 1% sensitivity improvement for both the $Z'_B$ and $Z'-$2HDM signals, the results are only obtained from this category for these two simplified models. In contrast, results for the heavy-scalar model are obtained from a simultaneous fit of all the categories.

The event yields in the observed data, expected signal and backgrounds in the five categories within a window of $120 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 130$ GeV are shown in Table IV. The signal samples shown correspond to a $Z'_B$ signal with $m_{Z'_B} = 200$ GeV and $m_{\chi} = 1$ GeV, a $Z'-$2HDM signal with

$m_{Z'} = 1000$ GeV, $m_{A^0} = 200$ GeV, and $m_{\chi} = 100$ GeV, and a heavy-scalar signal with $m_H = 275$ GeV and $m_{\chi} = 60$ GeV. For each benchmark signal model, the selection efficiency times acceptance denoted by "$A \times \epsilon$" is also shown. The yields for the nonresonant background are obtained from a fit to data while SM Higgs-boson events are estimated from the simulation. The uncertainties correspond to the quadrature sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties.

A. Limits on the visible cross section

The observed yields agree with the SM background predictions, as shown in Table IV, and no significant excess of events is observed. Upper limits are set on the visible cross section $\sigma_{\text{vis}}^{\text{BSM}} \equiv (A \times \epsilon \times \sigma \times B)^{\text{BSM}}$ for BSM physics processes producing missing transverse momentum and a SM Higgs boson decaying into two photons. The SM background prediction is excluded from this BSM visible cross section. Table V shows the observed and expected 95% confidence level (C.L.) upper limits on $\sigma_{\text{vis}}^{\text{BSM}}$, which are calculated using a one-sided profile-likelihood ratio and the C.L. formalism [64,65] with the asymptotic approximation in Ref. [66]. The same parametrizations for the BSM signal and the total SM Higgs-boson background are used in each of the five different categories. The fits are performed individually in each category. The statistical uncertainty is dominant. The systematic uncertainties worsen the limits by about 10% (7% from the nonresonant

<table><caption>TABLE IV. Event yields in the range of $120 < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 130$ GeV for data, signal models, the SM Higgs-boson background and nonresonant background in each analysis category, for an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$. The signal samples shown correspond to a heavy-scalar sample with $m_H = 275$ GeV and $m_{\chi} = 60$ GeV, a $Z'_B$ signal with $m_{Z'_B} = 200$ GeV and $m_{\chi} = 1$ GeV and a $Z'-$2HDM signal with $m_{Z'} = 1000$ GeV, $m_{A^0} = 200$ GeV, $m_{H^{0\pm}} = 300$ GeV and $m_{\chi} = 100$ GeV. For each benchmark signal model, the selection efficiency times acceptance denoted as "$A \times \epsilon$" is also shown. The yields for nonresonant background are obtained from a fit to data while SM Higgs-boson events are estimated from the simulation. The uncertainties correspond to the quadrature sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties.</caption><thead><tr><th>Category</th><th>Mono-Higgs</th><th>High-E<sup>miss</sup><sub>T</sub></th><th>Intermediate-E<sup>miss</sup><sub>T</sub></th><th>Different-vertex</th><th>Rest</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Data</td><td>9</td><td>72</td><td>464</td><td>1511</td><td>46804</td></tr><tr><td colspan="6">Backgrounds</td></tr><tr><td>SM Higgs boson</td><td>2.43 ± 0.22</td><td>4.2 ± 0.6</td><td>11.9 ± 2.7</td><td>44 ± 10</td><td>1360 ± 110</td></tr><tr><td>Nonresonant</td><td>9.9 ± 1.9</td><td>62 ± 5</td><td>418 ± 10</td><td>1490 ± 18</td><td>45570 ± 110</td></tr><tr><td>Total background</td><td>12.3 ± 1.9</td><td>67 ± 5</td><td>430 ± 10</td><td>1535 ± 21</td><td>46930 ± 170</td></tr><tr><td colspan="6">Z'<sub>B</sub> model, m<sub>Z'<sub>B</sub></sub> = 200 GeV, m<sub>χ</sub> = 1 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>Expected yields</td><td>20.0 ± 4.5</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>A × ε [%]</td><td>17.4 ± 0.2</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td colspan="6">Z'-$2\text{HDM}$ model, m<sub>Z'</sub> = 1000 GeV, m<sub>A<sup>0</sup></sub> = 200 GeV, m<sub>H<sup>0±</sup></sub> = 300 GeV, and m<sub>χ</sub> = 100 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>Expected yields</td><td>28.0 ± 5.3</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>A × ε [%]</td><td>70.7 ± 0.2</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td colspan="6">Heavy-scalar model, m<sub>H</sub> = 275 GeV, m<sub>χ</sub> = 60 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>Expected yields</td><td>10.9 ± 1.4</td><td>23.8 ± 3.2</td><td>43 ± 5</td><td>33 ± 5</td><td>222 ± 20</td></tr><tr><td>A × ε [%]</td><td>1.22 ± 0.07</td><td>2.67 ± 0.10</td><td>4.82 ± 0.14</td><td>3.65 ± 0.13</td><td>24.9 ± 0.4</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>TABLE V. Observed and expected upper limits (at 95% C.L.) on the visible cross section for BSM physics processes producing missing transverse momentum and a SM Higgs boson decaying into two photons. Limits are presented for the five different categories. The ±1σ exclusion from the expected limits are also given. For all the simulated signal points, the lowest and largest values of the acceptance times efficiency (A × e) for all three models are presented as a range. For the Z'$_B$ model, signals with DM mass mχ between 1 and 1000 GeV and mediator mass mZ' between 1 and 2000 GeV are taken into consideration. The samples with the mediator mass mZ' = 400–1400 GeV and pseudoscalar boson mass mA0 = 200–450 GeV are added for the Z'-2HDM model. For the heavy-scalar model, the values are taken from the signals points with mH = 260 to 350 GeV and mχ = 60 GeV.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Category</th><th colspan="2">σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>BSM</sup> [fb]</th><th colspan="3">A × e [%]</th></tr><tr><th>Observed</th><th>Expected</th><th>Z'-2HDM</th><th>Z'<sub>B</sub></th><th>Heavy scalar</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Mono-Higgs</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.23<sup>+0.11</sup><sub>-0.07</sub></td><td>53–74</td><td>15–63</td><td>1.0–4.0</td></tr><tr><td>High-E<sup>miss</sup><sub>T</sub></td><td>0.67</td><td>0.52<sup>+0.23</sup><sub>-0.15</sub></td><td>0.2–12</td><td>1.3–7.1</td><td>1.8–8.4</td></tr><tr><td>Intermediate-E<sup>miss</sup><sub>T</sub></td><td>1.6</td><td>1.2<sup>+0.5</sup><sub>-0.3</sub></td><td>0.05–5.0</td><td>0.6–5.5</td><td>3.9–6.6</td></tr><tr><td>Different-vertex</td><td>1.5</td><td>2.5<sup>+1.1</sup><sub>-0.7</sub></td><td>0.04–11</td><td>0.9–10</td><td>2.5–7.4</td></tr><tr><td>Rest</td><td>11</td><td>15<sup>+6</sup><sub>-4</sub></td><td>0.06–5.5</td><td>1.1–22</td><td>14–27</td></tr></tbody></table>

background modeling and 3% from the other systematic uncertainties). The ±1σ variations from the expected limits are also given. For the Mono-Higgs category, visible cross sections σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>BSM</sup> > 0.19 fb are excluded. The ranges of the acceptance times efficiency (A × e) for all three different models considered in this paper are also shown. For the Z'$_B$ model, signals with DM mass mχ between 1 and 1000 GeV and mediator mass mZ' between 1 and 2000 GeV are taken into consideration. The samples with the mediator mass

mZ' = 400–1400 GeV and pseudoscalar boson mass mA0 = 200–450 GeV are added for the Z'-2HDM model. For the heavy-scalar model, the values are taken from the signals points with mH = 260 to 350 GeV and mχ = 60 GeV.

## B. Interpretations of the Z'$_B$ and Z'-2HDM models

Figure 3 shows the mγγ distributions in the Mono-Higgs category as well as the fits for a Z'$_B$ benchmark point with mZ'$_B$ = 200 GeV and mχ = 1 GeV. No significant excess is observed in this category. Upper limits are set on the production cross sections in the two theoretical models considered. Figure 4(a) shows the observed and median expected 95% C.L. upper limits on σ(pp → hχχ) × B(h → γγ) as a function of the mediator mass mZ'$_B$ for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The cross sections times branching fraction of h → γγ larger than 2.3 fb are excluded for the full range of mZ'$_B$ between 10 and 2000 GeV at 95% C.L., and the Z'$_B$ model is excluded with Z'$_B$ masses below 850 GeV for a DM mass of 1 GeV.

In the Z'-2HDM scenario, the observed and median expected 95% C.L. upper limits on σ(pp → hχχ) × B(h → γγ) are shown in Fig. 4(b), as a function of the pseudoscalar boson mass mA0 for mχ = 100 GeV and mZ' = 1000 GeV. The masses of the neutral CP-even scalar (H0) and the charged scalars (H±) from Z'-2HDM model are set to 300 GeV. The theoretical cross section starts from mA0 = 201 GeV. The working point with mA0 = 200 GeV is excluded since the resonant production of DM particles at mχ = 100 GeV significantly increases the cross section of the process. To avoid the resonant regime where mA0 = 200 GeV and mχ = 100 GeV and allow a better limit interpolation, the point mA0 = 201 GeV is shown in this plot instead of 200 GeV. The drop of the theoretical prediction at mA0 = 345 GeV is due to a rapid change in the width when A0 decaying to t¯t is kinematically

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 3. Diphoton invariant mass distribution for data and the corresponding fitted signal and background in the Mono-Higgs category for the Z'$_B$ benchmark model fit using gq = 1/3, gχ = 1, sin θ = 0.3, and Dirac fermion DM mχ = 1 GeV as an illustration. A negative best-fit DM signal is found. The data is shown as dots with asymmetric error bars that represent central Poissonian confidence intervals at 68% C.L. The postfitted signal (solid red line), prefitted signal (dashed red line), SM Higgs boson (solid green line), nonresonant background (dashed blue line) and the nonresonant background plus the SM Higgs boson (dashed green line) are shown as well as the total of all those contributions (solid blue line). In the bottom panel, the “Bkg” represents the total background including the SM Higgs boson productions.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 4. Expected (dashed lines) and observed (solid lines) 95% C.L. upper limits on $\sigma(pp \to h\chi\bar{\chi}) \times B(h \to \gamma\gamma)$ for (a) the $Z'_B$ model for $g_q = 1/3$, $g_\chi = 1$, $\sin\theta = 0.3$ and Dirac fermion DM $m_\chi = 1$ GeV, and (b) the $Z'$-2HDM model for $\tan\beta = 1$, $g_{Z'} = 0.8$, $m_{Z'} = 1000$ GeV and Dirac fermion DM $m_\chi = 100$ GeV, as a function of $m_{Z'_B}$ and $m_{A^0}$, respectively. The masses of the neutral CP-even scalar ($H^0$) and the charged scalars ($H^\pm$) from $Z'$-2HDM model are set to 300 GeV. The theoretical predictions of $\sigma(pp \to h\chi\bar{\chi}) \times B(h \to \gamma\gamma)$ for these two models (dark-blue lines with blue bands representing their associated theoretical systematic uncertainties) are also shown. The inset shows a closeup view of the same figure in narrower ranges of both the x and y axes.</figcaption></figure>

allowed. Pseudoscalar boson masses below 280 GeV are excluded for $m_{Z'} = 1000$ GeV and $m_\chi = 100$ GeV. Tables VI and VII present the 95% C.L. observed and median expected limits on $\sigma(pp \to h\chi\bar{\chi}) \times B(h \to \gamma\gamma)$, respectively, for the $Z'_B$ benchmark model for different $Z'_B$ masses and the $Z'$-2HDM model for different pseudoscalar $A^0$ masses. The corresponding expected limits with one standard deviation are also shown.

A two-dimensional exclusion region in the plane formed by the mediator masses and the DM particle mass is obtained by means of a reweighting technique based on generator-level variables. Samples for a variety of mass points are generated using the MADGRAPH generator matched to PYTHIA 8.186 using the A14 tune for parton showering and hadronization. Bin-by-bin weights for each of the different mass points are obtained by comparing the

generator level distribution of a given variable to the distribution for the same variable in a fully simulated benchmark sample. This procedure can be repeated for other variables. In the case of $Z'_B$ samples, weights are derived using the true $E_T^{\text{miss}}$. In the case of $Z'$-2HDM samples, weights are derived in a two-dimensional plane of the true $E_T^{\text{miss}}$ and $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$. To validate this technique, several fully simulated and reconstructed samples are produced and their reconstruction-level variables are compared with the sample obtained from the reweighting technique. The acceptances of the samples after kinematic cuts agree within 5%, and the residual difference is treated as an extra systematic uncertainty in the signal yield. The observed and expected 95% C.L. limit contours for the signal strength $\sigma^{\text{obs}}/\sigma^{\text{th}}$ are shown in Fig. 5 for both the $Z'_B$ and $Z'$-2HDM models, in which $\sigma^{\text{obs}}$ is the observed limit on the model cross section at a given point of the parameter space and $\sigma^{\text{th}}$ is the predicted cross section in the model at the same point.

<table><caption>TABLE VI. Observed and expected 95% C.L. upper limits (in fb) on $\sigma(pp \to h\chi\bar{\chi}) \times B(h \to \gamma\gamma)$ and associated expected $\pm 1\sigma$ upper limits for the $Z'_B$ benchmark model for different $m_{Z'_B}$ and for a fixed mass $m_\chi = 1$ GeV.</caption><thead><tr><th>m<sub>Z'<sub>B</sub></sub><br>[GeV]</th><th>Observed</th><th>Expected</th><th>Expected + 1σ</th><th>Expected − 1σ</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>10</td><td>1.83</td><td>2.33</td><td>3.61</td><td>1.56</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>1.98</td><td>2.51</td><td>3.91</td><td>1.68</td></tr><tr><td>50</td><td>2.26</td><td>2.88</td><td>4.47</td><td>1.93</td></tr><tr><td>100</td><td>2.04</td><td>2.60</td><td>4.03</td><td>1.74</td></tr><tr><td>200</td><td>1.78</td><td>2.26</td><td>3.48</td><td>1.52</td></tr><tr><td>300</td><td>1.67</td><td>2.15</td><td>3.29</td><td>1.45</td></tr><tr><td>500</td><td>0.99</td><td>1.25</td><td>1.92</td><td>0.85</td></tr><tr><td>1000</td><td>0.59</td><td>0.74</td><td>1.16</td><td>0.50</td></tr><tr><td>2000</td><td>0.42</td><td>0.51</td><td>0.81</td><td>0.34</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>TABLE VII. Observed and expected 95% C.L. upper limits (in fb) on $\sigma(pp \to h\chi\bar{\chi}) \times B(h \to \gamma\gamma)$ and the associated expected $\pm 1\sigma$ upper limits for the $Z'$-2HDM benchmark model for different $m_{A^0}$ and $m_{Z'} = 1000$ GeV, $m_\chi = 100$ GeV.</caption><thead><tr><th>m<sub>A<sup>0</sup></sub><br>[GeV]</th><th>Observed</th><th>Expected</th><th>Expected + 1σ</th><th>Expected − 1σ</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>200</td><td>0.33</td><td>0.41</td><td>0.65</td><td>0.27</td></tr><tr><td>300</td><td>0.34</td><td>0.42</td><td>0.65</td><td>0.28</td></tr><tr><td>400</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.43</td><td>0.67</td><td>0.28</td></tr><tr><td>500</td><td>0.38</td><td>0.45</td><td>0.70</td><td>0.30</td></tr><tr><td>600</td><td>0.39</td><td>0.47</td><td>0.74</td><td>0.31</td></tr><tr><td>700</td><td>0.40</td><td>0.51</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.34</td></tr><tr><td>800</td><td>0.40</td><td>0.51</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.34</td></tr></tbody></table>
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 5. The ratios of the observed and expected 95% C.L. upper limits on the signal cross section to the predicted signal cross sections for (a) the $Z'_B$ model in the $(m_\chi, m_{Z'_B})$ plane and (b) the $Z'_{-2HDM}$ model in the $(m_{A^0}, m_{Z'})$ plane. For the $Z'_B$ model, the mixing angle $\sin\theta = 0.3$, and the coupling values $g_q = 1/3$ and $g_\chi = 1$ are used. In the scenario of $Z'_{-2HDM}$ model, the ratio of the two-Higgs-doublet vacuum expectation values $\tan\beta = 1.0$, Dirac fermion DM mass $m_\chi = 100$ GeV, and the coupling value $g_{Z'} = 0.8$ are used. The masses of the neutral CP-even scalar ($H^0$) and the charged scalars ($H^\pm$) from $Z'_{-2HDM}$ model are set to 300 GeV. The plus and minus one standard deviation expected exclusion curves are also shown as red dashed and dotted lines. The regions below the lines (i.e. with $\sigma^{\text{obs}}/\sigma^{\text{th}} < 1$) are excluded. In both figures, the gray dashed line corresponds to the boundary of the region above which the $Z'$ boson is produced off shell.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 6. A comparison of the inferred limits to the constraints from direct detection experiments on the spin-independent DM-nucleon cross section in the context of the $Z'_B$ simplified model with vector couplings. Limits are shown at 90% C.L. The results from this analysis, in which the region inside the contour is excluded, are compared with limits from the LUX [67], PandaX-II [68], XENON [69], superCDMS [70], and CRESST-II [71] experiments. The comparison is model dependent and solely valid in the context of this model, assuming Dirac fermion DM, mixing angle $\sin\theta = 0.3$, and the coupling values $g_q = 1/3$ and $g_\chi = 1$. The impact of renormalization-group evolution effects [72,73] when comparing collider and direct detection limits is not taken into consideration here.</figcaption></figure>

Figure 6 shows a comparison of the inferred limits to the constraints from direct detection experiments on the spin-independent (SI) DM-nucleon cross section in the context of the $Z'_B$ simplified model with vector couplings using the relation [5]

$$ \sigma_{N\chi}^{\text{SI}} = \frac{\mu_{N\chi}^2}{\pi A^2} [Z f_p - (A - Z) f_n]^2, $$

in which $\mu_{N\chi} = m_\chi m_N / (m_\chi + m_N)$ is the reduced mass of the DM-nucleon system, and $f_{p,n} = 3g_q g_\chi / m_{Z'_B}^2$ are the couplings between DM particles and protons and neutrons. The parameter Z is the number of protons in the considered nucleus and A the number of nucleons (both set to 1). Limits are shown at 90% C.L. For comparison, results from direct detection experiments (LUX [67], PandaX-II [68], XENON [69], superCDMS [70], and CRESST-II [71]) are also shown. The comparison is model dependent and solely valid in the context of this model. The results for the $Z'_B$ model, with couplings $g_q = 1/3$ and $g_\chi = 1$ for this search, are more stringent than direct detection experiments for $m_\chi < 2.5$ GeV and extend to DM masses well below 1 GeV. The shape of the exclusion line at DM mass $m_\chi \sim 200$ GeV to low masses is due to the loss of sensitivity in $Z'_B$ models where DM particles are produced via an off-shell process. The impact of renormalization-group evolution effects [72,73] when comparing collider and direct detection limits is not taken into consideration here.
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 7. Diphoton invariant mass distribution for data and the corresponding fitted signal and background in the five categories, (a) Mono-Higgs category, (b) high-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ category, (c) intermediate-$E_T^{\text{miss}}$ category, (d) different-vertex category, and (e) rest category. In each plot, the data (dots with asymmetric error bars) is shown. The error bars represent the central Poissonian confidence intervals at 68% C.L. The simultaneous fit result including a heavy-scalar signal (solid red line), SM Higgs boson (solid green line), the nonresonant background (dashed blue line), and the nonresonant background plus the SM Higgs boson (dashed green line) are shown as well as the sum of all those contributions (solid blue line). In the bottom panel, the “Bkg” represents the total background including the SM Higgs boson productions. The both prefitted and postfitted heavy-scalar signals shown here correspond to $m_H = 275$ GeV and scalar DM $m_\chi = 60$ GeV.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 8. Observed and expected 95% C.L. upper limits on the $\sigma(pp \to H) \times B(H \to \gamma\gamma\chi\chi)$ with a scalar DM candidate mass of 60 GeV as a function of the heavy-scalar-boson mass in the range $260 < m_H < 350$ GeV. A 100% branching fraction is assumed for $H \to h\chi\chi$. The theoretical prediction for the model (dark blue lines with blue bands representing their associated theoretical systematic uncertainties) is also shown. The theoretical cross section is assumed to be equal to that of a SM Higgs boson with the same mass produced in gluon-gluon fusion.</figcaption></figure>

### C. Interpretation of the heavy-scalar model

Figure 7 shows the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distributions in the five categories as well as the fitted contribution of a heavy-scalar boson for illustration. No significant excess is observed in any category. In the heavy-scalar interpretation, the 95% C.L. upper limits on the $\sigma(pp \to H) \times B(H \to \gamma\gamma\chi\chi)$ as a function of $m_H$ for $m_\chi = 60$ GeV are shown in Fig. 8 and Table VIII, where a 100% branching fraction is assumed for $H \to h\chi\chi$. The upper limit at 95% C.L. is 15.4 fb for $m_H = 260$ GeV, and 4.3 fb for $m_H = 350$ GeV.

<table><caption>TABLE VIII. Observed and expected 95% C.L. upper limits (in fb) on the $\sigma(pp \to H) \times B(H \to \gamma\gamma\chi\chi)$, where a 100% branching fraction is assumed for $H \to h\chi\chi$, and the associated expected $\pm 1\sigma$ upper limits for the heavy-scalar model for different mediator masses and $m_\chi = 60$ GeV.</caption><thead><tr><th><i>m</i><sub>H</sub> [GeV]</th><th>Observed</th><th>Expected</th><th>Expected + 1σ</th><th>Expected - 1σ</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>260</td><td>15.4</td><td>15.5</td><td>22.3</td><td>11.2</td></tr><tr><td>270</td><td>12.9</td><td>12.6</td><td>18.0</td><td>9.1</td></tr><tr><td>275</td><td>12.0</td><td>11.4</td><td>16.4</td><td>8.2</td></tr><tr><td>285</td><td>10.8</td><td>11.1</td><td>14.3</td><td>7.3</td></tr><tr><td>290</td><td>9.9</td><td>9.1</td><td>13.0</td><td>6.6</td></tr><tr><td>295</td><td>9.6</td><td>9.0</td><td>12.8</td><td>6.5</td></tr><tr><td>300</td><td>8.8</td><td>7.9</td><td>11.4</td><td>5.7</td></tr><tr><td>310</td><td>8.0</td><td>7.4</td><td>10.6</td><td>5.3</td></tr><tr><td>320</td><td>6.8</td><td>6.1</td><td>8.8</td><td>4.4</td></tr><tr><td>330</td><td>5.7</td><td>5.5</td><td>7.9</td><td>4.0</td></tr><tr><td>340</td><td>4.8</td><td>4.6</td><td>6.6</td><td>3.3</td></tr><tr><td>350</td><td>4.3</td><td>4.2</td><td>6.1</td><td>3.0</td></tr></tbody></table>

## IX. SUMMARY

A search for dark matter in association with a Higgs boson decaying to two photons is presented. This study is based on data collected with the ATLAS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb⁻¹ of proton-proton collisions at the LHC at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016. No significant excess over the expected background is observed. For the Mono-Higgs category, a visible cross section larger than 0.19 fb is excluded at 95% C.L. for BSM physics processes producing missing transverse momentum and a SM Higgs boson decaying into two photons. Upper limits at 95% C.L. are also set on the production cross section times branching fraction of the Higgs boson decaying into two photons in association with missing transverse momentum in three different benchmark models: a $Z'_B$ model, a $Z'$-2HDM model and a heavy scalar boson (H) model. Limits at 95% C.L. are also set on the observed signal strength in a two-dimensional $m_\chi - m_{Z'_B}$ plane for the $Z'_B$ model, and the $m_{A^0} - m_{Z'_B}$ plane for the $Z'$-2HDM model. Additionally, the results for the $Z'_B$ model are interpreted in terms of 90% C.L. limits on the dark-matter-nucleon scattering cross section, as a function of the dark-matter-particle mass, for a spin-independent scenario. For a dark-matter mass lower than 2.5 GeV, the constraint with couplings $g_q = 1/3$ and $g_\chi = 1$ placed on the DM-nucleon cross section is more stringent than limits from direct detection experiments. In the model involving the production of a heavy scalar boson, 95% C.L. upper limits are set on the production cross section times the branching fraction of $H \to h\chi\chi \to \gamma\gamma\chi\chi$ for a dark-matter particle with mass of 60 GeV, where a 100% branching fraction is assumed for $H \to h\chi\chi$. The heavy-scalar model assuming H production through gluon-gluon fusion with a cross section identical to that of a SM Higgs boson of the same mass, is excluded for all the benchmark points investigated.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DSM/IRFU, France; SRNSF, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, Netherlands;
RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZŠ, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, ERDF, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Région Auvergne and Fondation Partager

le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN, the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/ GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA), the Tier-2 facilities worldwide and large non-WLCG resource providers. Major contributors of computing resources are listed in Ref. [74].

[1] ATLAS Collaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B **716**, 1 (2012).

[2] CMS Collaboration, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B **716**, 30 (2012).

[3] C. Patrignani et al., Review of Particle Physics, Chin. Phys. C **40**, 100001 (2016).

[4] G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, Particle dark matter: evidence, candidates and constraints, Phys. Rep. **405**, 279 (2005).

[5] L. Carpenter, A. DiFranzo, M. Mulhearn, C. Shimmin, S. Tulin, and D. Whiteson, Mono-Higgs-boson: A new collider probe of dark matter, Phys. Rev. D **89**, 075017 (2014).

[6] A. A. Petrov and W. Shepherd, Searching for dark matter at LHC with Mono-Higgs production, Phys. Lett. B **730**, 178 (2014).

[7] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for Dark Matter in Events with Missing Transverse Momentum and a Higgs Boson Decaying to Two Photons in $pp$ Collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. **115**, 131801 (2015).

[8] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for dark matter produced in association with a Higgs boson decaying to two bottom quarks in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D **93**, 072007 (2016).

[9] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for dark matter in association with a Higgs boson decaying to $b$-quarks in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B **765**, 11 (2017).

[10] CMS Collaboration, Search for associated production of dark matter with a Higgs boson decaying to $b\bar{b}$ or $\gamma\gamma$ at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV, arXiv:1703.05236.

[11] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for Dark Matter Produced in Association with a Higgs Boson Decaying to $b\bar{b}$ using 36 $fb^{-1}$ of $pp$ Collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. **119**, 181804 (2017).

[12] D. Abercrombie et al., Dark matter benchmark models for early LHC run-2 searches: Report of the ATLAS/CMS dark matter forum, arXiv:1507.00966.

[13] A. Berlin, T. Lin, and L.-T. Wang, Mono-Higgs detection of dark matter at the LHC, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2014) 078.

[14] S. von Buddenbrock, N. Chakrabarty, A. S. Cornell, D. Kar, M. Kumar, T. Mandal, B. Mellado, B. Mukhopadhyaya, R. G. Reed, and X. Ruan, Phenomenological signatures of additional scalar bosons at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C **76**, 580 (2016).

[15] W.-L. Guo and Y.-L. Wu, The real singlet scalar dark matter model, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2010), 083.

[16] ATLAS Collaboration, The ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, J. Instrum. **3**, S08003 (2008).

[17] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATLAS-TDR-19, https://cds.cern.ch/record/1291633; Report No. ATLAS-TDR-023, https://cds.cern.ch/record/1602235.

[18] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of the ATLAS Trigger System in 2015, Eur. Phys. J. C **77**, 317 (2017).

[19] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for resonances in diphoton events at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2016) 001.

[20] 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) 79.

[21] R. D. Ball et al., Parton distributions for the LHC run II, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2015) 040.

[22] T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands, A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1, Comput. Phys. Commun. **178**, 852 (2008).

[23] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-021, https://cds.cern.ch/record/1966419.

[24] R. D. Ball et al. (NNPDF Collaboration), Parton distributions with LHC data, Nucl. Phys. **B867**, 244 (2013).
[25] P. Nason, A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2004) 040.

[26] S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, NLO Higgs boson production via gluon fusion matched with shower in POWHEG, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2009) 002.

[27] P. Nason and C. Oleari, NLO Higgs boson production via vector-boson fusion matched with shower in POWHEG, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2010) 037.

[28] 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.

[29] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2013-017, https://cds.cern.ch/record/1629317.

[30] H.-L. Lai, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, Z. Li, P. M. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, and C.-P. Yuan, New parton distributions for collider physics, Phys. Rev. D **82**, 074024 (2010).

[31] T. Gleisberg et al., Event generation with SHERPA 1.1, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2009) 007.

[32] S. Schumann and F. Krauss, A Parton shower algorithm based on Catani-Seymour dipole factorisation, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2008) 038.

[33] S. Höche, F. Krauss, S. Schumann, and F. Siegert, QCD matrix elements and truncated showers, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2009) 053.

[34] D. de Florian et al., Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 4. Deciphering the nature of the Higgs sector, arXiv:1610.07922.

[35] ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, Combined Measurement of the Higgs Boson Mass in $pp$ Collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ and 8 TeV with the ATLAS and CMS Experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. **114**, 191803 (2015).

[36] D. J. Lange, The EvtGen particle decay simulation package, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A **462**, 152 (2001).

[37] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2012-003, https://cds.cern.ch/record/1474107/.

[38] ATLAS Collaboration, The ATLAS Simulation Infrastructure, Eur. Phys. J. C **70**, 823 (2010).

[39] S. Agostinelli et al., GEANT4—A Simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A **506**, 250 (2003).

[40] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the photon identification efficiencies with the ATLAS detector using LHC Run-1 data, Eur. Phys. J. C **76**, 666 (2016).

[41] ATLAS Collaboration, Electron and photon energy calibration with the ATLAS detector using LHC Run 1 data, Eur. Phys. J. C **74**, 3071 (2014).

[42] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-014, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2203125.

[43] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of Higgs boson production in the diphoton decay channel in $pp$ collisions at center-of-mass energies of 7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D **90**, 112015 (2014).

[44] ATLAS Collaboration, Topological cell clustering in the ATLAS calorimeters and its performance in LHC Run 1, Eur. Phys. J. C **77**, 490 (2017).

[45] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, The catchment area of jets, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2008) 005.

[46] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of pile-up mitigation techniques for jets in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV using the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C **76**, 581 (2016).

[47] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the Higgs boson mass from the $H \to \gamma\gamma$ and $H \to ZZ^*$ $\to 4\ell$ channels with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D **90**, 052004 (2014).

[48] ATLAS Collaboration, Electron efficiency measurements with the ATLAS detector using 2012 LHC proton-proton collision data, Eur. Phys. J. C **77**, 195 (2017).

[49] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-041, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2048202.

[50] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurements of fiducial and differential cross sections for Higgs boson production in the diphoton decay channel at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV with ATLAS, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2014) 112.

[51] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the muon reconstruction performance of the ATLAS detector using 2011 and 2012 LHC proton-proton collision data, Eur. Phys. J. C **74**, 3130 (2014).

[52] ATLAS Collaboration, Muon reconstruction performance of the ATLAS detector in proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C **76**, 292 (2016).

[53] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, The anti-kt jet clustering algorithm, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2008) 063.

[54] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-001, https://cds.cern.ch/record/1643929.

[55] ATLAS Collaboration, Jet energy scale measurements and their systematic uncertainties in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D **96**, 072002 (2017).

[56] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of missing transverse momentum reconstruction in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV with ATLAS, Eur. Phys. J. C **72**, 1844 (2012).

[57] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-027, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2037904.

[58] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of isolated-photon pair production in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV with the ATLAS detector, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2013) 086.

[59] T. Aaltonen et al. (CDF Collaboration), Search for new particles decaying into dijets in proton-antiproton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 1.96$ TeV, Phys. Rev. D **79**, 112002 (2009).

[60] ATLAS Collaboration, Luminosity determination in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C **76**, 653 (2016).

[61] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-023, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2037700.

[62] S. Dulat, T.-J. Hou, J. Gao, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, P. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, C. Schmidt, D. Stump, and C.-P. Yuan, New parton distribution functions from a global analysis of quantum chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D **93**, 033006 (2016).

[63] L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, P. Motylinski, and R. S. Thorne, Parton distributions in the LHC era: MMHT 2014 PDFs, Eur. Phys. J. C **75**, 204 (2015).

[64] A. L. Read, Presentation of search results: The CLs technique, J. Phys. G **28**, 2693 (2002).

[65] T. Junk, Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A **434**, 435 (1999).
[66] G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Asymp-
totic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics,
Eur. Phys. J. C **71**, 1554 (2011); Erratum, Eur. Phys. J. C **73**,
2501 (2013).

[67] D. S. Akerib et al. (LUX Collaboration), Results from a
Search for Dark Matter in the Complete LUX exposure,
Phys. Rev. Lett. **118**, 021303 (2017).

[68] A. Tan et al. (PandaX-II Collaboration), Dark Matter
Results from First 98.7 Days of Data from the PandaX-II
Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. **117**, 121303 (2016).

[69] E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration), First Dark Matter Search Results from the XENON1T Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. **119**, 181301 (2017).

[70] R. Agnese et al. (SuperCDMS Collaboration), New
Results from the Search for Low-Mass Weakly Interacting

Massive Particles with the CDMS Low Ionization
Threshold Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. **116**, 071301
(2016).

[71] G. Angloher et al. (CRESST Collaboration), Results on light dark matter particles with a low-threshold CRESST-II detector, Eur. Phys. J. C **76**, 25 (2016).

[72] A. Crivellin, F. D'Eramo, and M. Procura, New Constraints on Dark Matter Effective Theories from Standard Model Loops, Phys. Rev. Lett. **112**, 191304 (2014).

[73] F. D'Eramo and M. Procura, Connecting dark matter UV complete models to direct detection rates via effective field theory, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2015) 054.

[74] ATLAS Collaboration, Report No. ATL-GEN-PUB-2016-002, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2202407.

M. Aaboud,¹³⁷d G. Aad,⁸⁸ B. Abbott,¹¹⁵ O. Abdinov,¹²,ª B. Abeloos,¹¹⁹ S. H. Abidi,¹⁶¹ O. S. AbouZeid,¹³⁹ N. L. Abraham,¹⁵¹
H. Abramowicz,¹⁵⁵ H. Abreu,¹⁵⁴ R. Abreu,¹¹⁸ Y. Abulaiti,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b B. S. Acharya,¹⁶⁷a,¹⁶⁷b,ᵇ S. Adachi,¹⁵⁷ L. Adamczyk,⁴¹a
J. Adelman,¹¹⁰ M. Adersberger,¹⁰² T. Adye,¹³³ A. A. Affolder,¹³⁹ T. Agatonovic-Jovin,¹⁴ C. Agheorghiesi,²⁸c
J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸f S. P. Ahlen,²⁴ F. Ahmadov,⁶⁸,c G. Aielli,¹³⁵a,¹³⁵b S. Akatsuka,⁷¹ H. Akerstedt,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b

T. P. A. Åkesson,⁸⁴ E. Akilli,⁵² A. V. Akimov,⁹⁸ G. L. Alberghi,²²a,²²b J. Albert,¹⁷² P. Albicocco,⁵⁰ M. J. Alconada Verzini,⁷⁴

S. C. Alderweireldt,¹⁰⁸ M. Aleksa,³² I. N. Aleksandrov,⁶⁸ C. Alexa,²⁸b G. Alexander,¹⁵⁵ T. Alexopoulos,¹⁰ M. Alhroob,¹¹⁵

B. Ali,¹³⁰ M. Aliev,⁷⁶a,⁷⁶b G. Alimonti,⁹⁴a J. Alison,³³ S. P. Alkire,³⁸ B. M. M. Allbrooke,¹⁵¹ B. W. Allen,¹¹⁸ P. P. Allport,¹⁹

A. Aloisio,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b A. Alonso,³⁹ F. Alonso,⁷⁴ C. Alpigiani,¹⁴⁰ A. A. Alshehri,⁵⁶ M. Alstaty,⁸⁸ B. Alvarez Gonzalez,³²

D. Álvarez Piqueras,¹⁷⁰ M. G. Alviggi,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b B. T. Amadio,¹⁶ Y. Amaral Coutinho,²⁶a C. Amelung,²⁵ D. Amidei,⁹²

S. P. Amor Dos Santos,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸c A. Amorim,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b S. Amoroso,³² G. Amundsen,²⁵ C. Anastopoulos,¹⁴¹ L. S. Ancu,⁵²

N. Andari,¹⁹ T. Andeen,¹¹ C. F. Anders,⁶⁰b J. K. Anders,⁷⁷ K. J. Anderson,³³ A. Andreazza,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b V. Andrei,⁶⁰a

S. Angelidakis,⁹ I. Angelozzi,¹⁰⁹ A. Angerami,³⁸ A. V. Anisenkov,¹¹¹d N. Anjos,¹³ A. Annovi,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b C. Antel,⁶⁰a

M. Antonelli,⁵⁰ A. Antonov,¹⁰⁰,a D. J. Antrim,¹⁶⁶ F. Anulli,¹³⁴a M. Aoki,⁶⁹ L. Aperio Bella,³² G. Arabidze,⁹³ Y. Arai,⁶⁹

J. P. Araque,¹²⁸a V. Araujo Ferraz,²⁶a A. T. H. Arce,⁴⁸ R. E. Ardell,⁸⁰ F. A. Arduh,⁷⁴ J-F. Arguin,⁹⁷ S. Argyropoulos,⁶⁶

M. Arik,²⁰a A. J. Armbruster,³² L. J. Armitage,⁷⁹ O. Arnaez,¹⁶¹ H. Arnold,⁵¹ M. Arratia,³⁰ O. Arslan,²³ A. Artamonov,⁹⁹

G. Artoni,¹²² S. Artz,⁸⁶ S. Asai,¹⁵⁷ N. Asbah,⁴⁵ A. Ashkenazi,¹⁵⁵ L. Asquith,¹⁵¹ K. Assamagan,²⁷ R. Astalos,¹⁴⁶a

M. Atkinson,¹⁶⁹ N. B. Atlay,¹⁴³ K. Augsten,¹³⁰ G. Avolio,³² B. Axen,¹⁶ M. K. Ayoub,¹¹⁹ G. Azuelos,⁹⁷,e A. E. Baas,⁶⁰a

M. J. Baca,¹⁹ H. Bachacou,¹³⁸ K. Bachas,⁷⁶a,⁷⁶b M. Backes,¹²² M. Backhaus,³² P. Bagnaia,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b M. Bahmani,⁴²

H. Bahrasemani,¹⁴⁴ J. T. Baines,¹³³ M. Bajic,³⁹ O. K. Baker,¹⁷⁹ E. M. Baldin,¹¹¹,d P. Balek,¹⁷⁵ F. Balli,¹³⁸ W. K. Balunas,¹²⁴

E. Banas,⁴² A. Bandyopadhyay,²³ Sw. Banerjee,¹⁷⁶f A. A. E. Bannoura,¹⁷⁸ L. Barak,³² E. L. Barberio,⁹¹ D. Barberis,⁵³a,⁵³b

M. Barbero,⁸⁸ T. Barillari,¹⁰³ M-S Barisits,³² J. T. Barkeloo,¹¹⁸ T. Barklow,¹⁴⁵ N. Barlow,³⁰ S. L. Barnes,³⁶c B. M. Barnett,¹³³

R. M. Barnett,¹⁶ Z. Barnovska-Blenessy,³⁶a A. Baroncelli,¹³⁶a G. Barone,²⁵ A. J. Barr,¹²² L. Barranco Navarro,¹⁷⁰

F. Barreiro,⁸⁵ J. Barreiro Guimarães da Costa,³⁵a R. Bartoldus,¹⁴⁵ A. E. Barton,⁷⁵ P. Bartos,¹⁴⁶a A. Basalaev,¹²⁵

A. Bassalat,¹¹⁹,g R. L. Bates,⁵⁶ S. J. Batista,¹⁶¹ J. R. Batley,³⁰ M. Battaglia,¹³⁹ M. Bauce,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b F. Bauer,¹³⁸ H. S. Bawa,¹⁴⁵,h

J. B. Beacham,¹¹³ M. D. Beattie,⁷⁵ T. Beau,⁸³ P. H. Beauchemin,¹⁶⁵ P. Bechtle,²³ H. P. Beck,¹⁸,i H. C. Beck,⁵⁷ K. Becker,¹²²

M. Becker,⁸⁶ M. Beckingham,¹⁷³ C. Becot,¹¹² A. J. Beddall,²⁰d A. Beddall,²⁰b V. A. Bednyakov,⁶⁸ M. Bedognetti,¹⁰⁹

C. P. Bee,¹⁵⁰ T. A. Beermann,³² M. Begalli,²⁶a M. Begel,²⁷ J. K. Behr,⁴⁵ A. S. Bell,⁸¹ G. Bella,¹⁵⁵ L. Bellagamba,²²a

A. Bellerive,³¹ M. Bellomo,¹⁵⁴ K. Belotskiy,¹⁰⁰ O. Beltramello,³² N. L. Belyaev,¹⁰⁰ O. Benary,¹⁵⁵,a D. Benchekroun,¹³⁷a

M. Bender,¹⁰² K. Bendtz,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b N. Benekos,¹⁰ Y. Benhammou,¹⁵⁵ E. Benhar Noccioli,¹⁷⁹ J. Benitez,⁶⁶ D. P. Benjamin,⁴⁸

M. Benoit,⁵² J. R. Bensinger,²⁵ S. Bentvelsen,¹⁰⁹ L. Beresford,¹²² M. Beretta,⁵⁰ D. Berge,¹⁰⁹ E. Bergeaas Kuutmann,¹⁶⁸

N. Berger,⁵ J. Beringer,¹⁶ S. Berlendis,⁵⁸ N. R. Bernard,⁸⁹ G. Bernardi,⁸³ C. Bernius,¹⁴⁵ F. U. Bernlochner,²³ T. Berry,⁸⁰

P. Berta,¹³¹ C. Bertella,³⁵a G. Bertoli,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b F. Bertolucci,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b I. A. Bertram,⁷⁵ C. Bertsche,⁴⁵ D. Bertsche,¹¹⁵

G. J. Besjes,³⁹ O. Bessidskaia Bylund,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b M. Bessner,⁴⁵ N. Besson,¹³⁸ C. Betancourt,⁵¹ A. Bethani,⁸⁷ S. Bethke,¹⁰³
A. J. Bevan,⁷⁹ J. Beyer,¹⁰³ R. M. Bianchi,¹²⁷ O. Biebel,¹⁰² D. Biedermann,¹⁷ R. Bielski,⁸⁷ K. Bierwagen,⁸⁶
N. V. Biesuz,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b M. Biglietti,¹³⁶a T. R. V. Billoud,⁹⁷ H. Bilokon,⁵⁰ M. Bindi,⁵⁷ A. Bingul,²⁰b C. Bini,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b

S. Biondi,²²a,²²b T. Bisanz,⁵⁷ C. Bittrich,⁴⁷ D. M. Bjergaard,⁴⁸ C. W. Black,¹⁵² J. E. Black,¹⁴⁵ K. M. Black,²⁴ R. E. Blair,⁶

T. Blazek,¹⁴⁶a I. Bloch,⁴⁵ C. Blocker,²⁵ A. Blue,⁵⁶ W. Blum,⁸⁶a U. Blumenschein,⁷⁹ S. Blunier,³⁴a G. J. Bobbink,¹⁰⁹

V. S. Bobrovnikov,¹¹d S. S. Bocchetta,⁸⁴ A. Bocci,⁴⁸ C. Bock,¹⁰² M. Boehler,⁵¹ D. Boerner,¹⁷⁸ D. Bogavac,¹⁰²

A. G. Bogdanchikov,¹¹¹ C. Bohm,¹⁴⁸a V. Boisvert,⁸⁰ P. Bokan,¹⁶⁸j T. Bold,⁴¹a A. S. Boldyrev,¹⁰¹ A. E. Bolz,⁶⁰b

M. Bomben,⁸³ M. Bona,⁷⁹ M. Boonekamp,¹³⁸ A. Borisov,¹³² G. Borissov,⁷⁵ J. Bortfeldt,³² D. Bortoletto,¹²²

V. Bortolotto,⁶²a,⁶²b,⁶²c D. Boscherini,²²a M. Bosman,¹³ J. D. Bossio Sola,²⁹ J. Boudreau,¹²⁷ J. Bouffard,²

E. V. Bouhova-Thacker,⁷⁵ D. Boumediene,³⁷ C. Bourdarios,¹¹⁹ S. K. Boutle,⁵⁶ A. Boveia,¹¹³ J. Boyd,³² I. R. Boyko,⁶⁸

J. Bracinik,¹⁹ A. Brandt,⁸ G. Brandt,⁵⁷ O. Brandt,⁶⁰a U. Bratzler,¹⁵⁸ B. Brau,⁸⁹ J. E. Brau,¹¹⁸ W. D. Breaden Madden,⁵⁶

K. Brendlinger,⁴⁵ A. J. Brennan,⁹¹ L. Brenner,¹⁰⁹ R. Brenner,¹⁶⁸ S. Bressler,¹⁷⁵ D. L. Briglin,¹⁹ T. M. Bristow,⁴⁹ D. Britton,⁵⁶

D. Britzger,⁴⁵ F. M. Brochu,³⁰ I. Brock,²³ R. Brock,⁹³ G. Brooijmans,³⁸ T. Brooks,⁸⁰ W. K. Brooks,³⁴b J. Brosamer,¹⁶

E. Brost,¹¹⁰ J. H. Broughton,¹⁹ P. A. Bruckman de Renstrom,⁴² D. Bruncko,¹⁴⁶b A. Bruni,²²a G. Bruni,²²a L. S. Bruni,¹⁰⁹

BH Brunt,³⁰ M. Bruschi,²²a N. Bruscino,²³ P. Bryant,³³ L. Bryngemark,⁴⁵ T. Buanes,¹⁵ Q. Buat,¹⁴⁴ P. Buchholz,¹⁴³

A. G. Buckley,⁵⁶ I. A. Budagov,⁶⁸ F. Buehrer,⁵¹ M. K. Bugge,¹²¹ O. Bulekov,¹⁰⁰ D. Bullock,⁸ T. J. Burch,¹¹⁰ S. Burdin,⁷⁷

C. D. Burgard,⁵¹ A. M. Burger,⁵ B. Burghgrave,¹¹⁰ K. Burka,⁴² S. Burke,¹³³ I. Burmeister,⁴⁶ J. T. P. Burr,¹²² E. Busato,³⁷

D. Büscher,⁵¹ V. Büscher,⁸⁶ P. Bussey,⁵⁶ J. M. Butler,²⁴ C. M. Buttar,⁵⁶ J. M. Butterworth,⁸¹ P. Butti,³² W. Buttinger,²⁷

A. Buzatu,³⁵c A. R. Buzykaev,¹¹¹d S. Cabrera Urbán,¹⁷⁰ D. Caforio,¹³⁰ V. M. Cairo,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b O. Cakir,⁴a N. Calace,⁵²

P. Calafiura,¹⁶ A. Calandri,⁸⁸ G. Calderini,⁸³ P. Calfayan,⁶⁴ G. Callea,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b L. P. Caloba,²⁶a S. Calvente Lopez,⁸⁵ D. Calvet,³⁷

S. Calvet,³⁷ T. P. Calvet,⁸⁸ R. Camacho Toro,³³ S. Camarda,³² P. Camarri,¹³⁵a,¹³⁵b D. Cameron,¹²¹ R. Caminal Armadans,¹⁶⁹

C. Camincher,⁵⁸ S. Campana,³² M. Campanelli,⁸¹ A. Camplani,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b A. Campoverde,¹⁴³ V. Canale,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b M. Cano Bret,³⁶c

J. Cantero,¹¹⁶ T. Cao,¹⁵⁵ M. D. M. Capeans Garrido,³² I. Caprini,²⁸b M. Caprini,²⁸b M. Capua,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b R. M. Carbone,³⁸

R. Cardarelli,¹³⁵a F. Cardillo,⁵¹ I. Carli,¹³¹ T. Carli,³² G. Carlino,¹⁰⁶a B. T. Carlson,¹²⁷ L. Carminati,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b

R. M. D. Carney,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b S. Caron,¹⁰⁸ E. Carquin,³⁴b S. Carrá,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b G. D. Carrillo-Montoya,³² J. Carvalho,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸c

D. Casadei,¹⁹ M. P. Casado,¹³,k M. Casolino,¹³ D. W. Casper,¹⁶⁶ R. Castelijn,¹⁰⁹ V. Castillo Gimenez,¹⁷⁰ N. F. Castro,¹²⁸a,¹

A. Catinaccio,³² J. R. Catmore,¹²¹ A. Cattai,³² J. Caudron,²³ V. Cavaliere,¹⁶⁹ E. Cavallaro,¹³ D. Cavalli,⁹⁴a

M. Cavalli-Sforza,¹³ V. Cavasinni,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b E. Celebi,²⁰a F. Ceradini,¹³⁶a,¹³⁶b L. Cerda Alberich,¹⁷⁰ A. S. Cerqueira,²⁶b

A. Cerri,¹⁵¹ L. Cerrito,¹³⁵a,¹³⁵b F. Cerutti,¹⁶ A. Cervelli,¹⁸ S. A. Cetin,²⁰c A. Chafaq,¹³⁷a D. Chakraborty,¹¹⁰ S. K. Chan,⁵⁹

W. S. Chan,¹⁰⁹ Y. L. Chan,⁶²a P. Chang,¹⁶⁹ J. D. Chapman,³⁰ D. G. Charlton,¹⁹ C. C. Chau,¹⁶¹ C. A. Chavez Barajas,¹⁵¹

S. Che,¹¹³ S. Cheatham,¹⁶⁷a,¹⁶⁷c A. Chegwidden,⁹³ S. Chekanov,⁶ S. V. Chekulaev,¹⁶³a G. A. Chelkov,⁶⁸m

M. A. Chelstowska,³² C. Chen,⁶⁷ H. Chen,²⁷ J. Chen,³⁶a S. Chen,³⁵b S. Chen,¹⁵⁷ X. Chen,³⁵c,n Y. Chen,⁷⁰ H. C. Cheng,⁹²

H. J. Cheng,³⁵a A. Cheplakov,⁶⁸ E. Cheremushkina,¹³² R. Cherkaoui El Moursli,¹³⁷e E. Cheu,⁷ K. Cheung,⁶³ L. Chevalier,¹³⁸

V. Chiarella,⁵⁰ G. Chiarelli,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b G. Chiodini,⁷⁶a A. S. Chisholm,³² A. Chitan,²⁸b Y. H. Chiu,¹²⁷ M. V. Chizhov,⁶⁸

K. Choi,⁶⁴ A. R. Chomont,³⁷ S. Chouridou,¹⁵⁶ V. Christodoulou,⁸¹ D. Chromek-Burckhart,³² M. C. Chu,⁶²a J. Chudoba,¹²⁹

A. J. Chuinard,⁹⁰ J. J. Chwastowski,⁴² L. Chytka,¹¹⁷ A. K. Ciftci,⁴a D. Cinca,⁴⁶ V. Cindro,⁷⁸ I. A. Cioara,²³ C. Ciocca,²²a,²²b

A. Ciocio,¹⁶ F. Cirotto,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b Z. H. Citron,¹⁷⁵ M. Citterio,⁹⁴a M. Ciubancan,²⁸b A. Clark,⁵² B. L. Clark,⁵⁹ M. R. Clark,³⁸

P. J. Clark,⁴⁹ R. N. Clarke,¹⁶ C. Clement,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b Y. Coadou,⁸⁸ M. Cobal,¹⁶⁷a,¹⁶⁷c A. Coccaro,⁵² J. Cochran,⁶⁷ L. Colasurdo,¹⁰⁸

B. Cole,³⁸ A. P. Colijn,¹⁰⁹ J. Collot,⁵⁸ T. Colombo,¹⁶⁶ P. Conde Muiño,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b E. Coniavitis,⁵¹ S. H. Connell,¹⁴⁷b

I. A. Connelly,⁸⁷ S. Constantinescu,²⁸b G. Conti,³² F. Conventi,¹⁰⁶a,⁰ M. Cooke,¹⁶ A. M. Cooper-Sarkar,¹²² F. Cormier,¹⁷¹

K. J. R. Cormier,¹⁶¹ M. Corradi,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b F. Corriveau,⁹⁰p A. Cortes-Gonzalez,³² G. Cortiana,¹⁰³ G. Costa,⁹⁴a M. J. Costa,¹⁷⁰

D. Costanzo,¹⁴¹ G. Cottin,³⁰ G. Cowan,⁸⁰ B. E. Cox,⁸⁷ K. Cranmer,¹¹² S. J. Crawley,⁵⁶ R. A. Creager,¹²⁴ G. Cree,³¹

S. Crépé-Renaudin,⁵⁸ F. Crescioli,⁸³ W. A. Cribbs,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b M. Cristinziani,²³ V. Croft,¹⁰⁸ G. Crosetti,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b A. Cueto,⁸⁵

T. Cuhadar Donszelmann,¹⁴¹ A. R. Cukierman,¹⁴⁵ J. Cummings,¹⁷⁹ M. Curatolo,⁵⁰ J. Cúth,⁸⁶ S. Czekierda,⁴²

P. Czodrowski,³² G. D'amen,²²a,²²b S. D'Auria,⁵⁶ L. D'eramo,⁸³ M. D'Onofrio,⁷⁷ M. J. Da Cunha Sargedas De Sousa,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b

C. Da Via,⁸⁷ W. Dabrowski,⁴¹a T. Dado,¹⁴⁶a T. Dai,⁹² O. Dale,¹⁵ F. Dallaire,⁹⁷ C. Dallapiccola,⁸⁹ M. Dam,³⁹ J. R. Dandoy,¹²⁴

M. F. Daneri,²⁹ N. P. Dang,¹⁷⁶ A. C. Daniells,¹⁹ N. S. Dann,⁸⁷ M. Danninger,¹⁷¹ M. Dano Hoffmann,¹³⁸ V. Dao,¹⁵⁰

G. Darbo,⁵³a S. Darmora,⁸ J. Dassoulas,³ A. Dattagupta,¹¹⁸ T. Daubney,⁴⁵ W. Davey,²³ C. David,⁴⁵ T. Davidek,¹³¹

D. R. Davis,⁴⁸ P. Davison,⁸¹ E. Dawe,⁹¹ I. Dawson,¹⁴¹ K. De,⁸ R. de Asmundis,¹⁰⁶a A. De Benedetti,¹¹⁵ S. De Castro,²²a,²²b

S. De Cecco,⁸³ N. De Groot,¹⁰⁸ P. de Jong,¹⁰⁹ H. De la Torre,⁹³ F. De Lorenzi,⁶⁷ A. De Maria,⁵⁷ D. De Pedis,¹³⁴a
A. De Salvo,¹³⁴a U. De Sanctis,¹³⁵a,¹³⁵b A. De Santo,¹⁵¹ K. De Vasconcelos Corga,⁸⁸ J. B. De Vivie De Regie,¹¹⁹
W. J. Dearnaley,⁷⁵ R. Debbe,²⁷ C. Debenedetti,¹³⁹ D. V. Dedovich,⁶⁸ N. Dehghanian,³ I. Deigaard,¹⁰⁹ M. Del Gaudio,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b
J. Del Peso,⁸⁵ D. Delgove,¹¹⁹ F. Deliot,¹³⁸ C. M. Delitzsch,⁷ A. Dell'Acqua,³² L. Dell'Asta,²⁴ M. Dell'Orso,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b
M. Della Pietra,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b D. della Volpe,⁵² M. Delmastro,⁵ C. Delporte,¹¹⁹ P. A. Delsart,⁵⁸ D. A. DeMarco,¹⁶¹ S. Demers,¹⁷⁹
M. Demichev,⁶⁸ A. Demilly,⁸³ S. P. Denisov,¹³² D. Denysiuk,¹³⁸ D. Derendarz,⁴² J. E. Derkaoui,¹³⁷d F. Derue,⁸³ P. Dervan,⁷⁷
K. Desch,²³ C. Deterre,⁴⁵ K. Dette,⁴⁶ M. R. Devesa,²⁹ P. O. Deviveiros,³² A. Dewhurst,¹³³ S. Dhaliwal,²⁵ F. A. Di Bello,⁵²
A. Di Ciaccio,¹³⁵a,¹³⁵b L. Di Ciaccio,⁵ W. K. Di Clemente,¹²⁴ C. Di Donato,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b A. Di Girolamo,³² B. Di Girolamo,³²
B. Di Micco,¹³⁶a,¹³⁶b R. Di Nardo,³² K. F. Di Petrillo,⁵⁹ A. Di Simone,⁵¹ R. Di Sipio,¹⁶¹ D. Di Valentino,³¹ C. Diaconu,⁸⁸
M. Diamond,¹⁶¹ F. A. Dias,³⁹ M. A. Diaz,³⁴a E. B. Diehl,⁹² J. Dietrich,¹⁷ S. Díez Cornell,⁴⁵ A. Dimitrievska,¹⁴
J. Dingfelder,²³ P. Dita,²⁸b S. Dita,²⁸b F. Dittus,³² F. Djama,⁸⁸ T. Djobava,⁵⁴b J. I. Djuvsland,⁶⁰a M. A. B. do Vale,²⁶c
D. Dobos,³² M. Dobre,²⁸b C. Doglioni,⁸⁴ J. Dolejsi,¹³¹ Z. Dolezal,¹³¹ M. Donadelli,²⁶d S. Donati,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b P. Dondero,¹²³a,¹²³b
J. Donini,³⁷ J. Dopke,¹³³ A. Doria,¹⁰⁶a M. T. Dova,⁷⁴ A. T. Doyle,⁵⁶ E. Drechsler,⁵⁷ M. Dris,¹⁰ Y. Du,³⁶b
J. Duarte-Campderros,¹⁵⁵ A. Dubreuil,⁵² E. Duchovni,¹⁷⁵ G. Duckeck,¹⁰² A. Ducourthial,⁸³ O. A. Ducu,⁹⁷q D. Duda,¹⁰⁹
A. Dudarev,³² A. Chr. Dudder,⁸⁶ E. M. Duffield,¹⁶ L. Duflot,¹¹⁹ M. Dührssen,³² M. Dumancic,¹⁷⁵ A. E. Dumitriu,²⁸b
A. K. Duncan,⁵⁶ M. Dunford,⁶⁰a H. Duran Yildiz,⁴a M. Düren,⁵⁵ A. Durglishvili,⁵⁴b D. Duschinger,⁴⁷ B. Dutta,⁴⁵
M. Dyndal,⁴⁵ B. S. Dziedzic,⁴² C. Eckardt,⁴⁵ K. M. Ecker,¹⁰³ R. C. Edgar,⁹² T. Eifert,³² G. Eigen,¹⁵ K. Einsweiler,¹⁶
T. Ekelof,¹⁶⁸ M. El Kacimi,¹³⁷c R. El Kosseifi,⁸⁸ V. Ellajosyula,⁸⁸ M. Ellert,¹⁶⁸ S. Elles,⁵ F. Ellinghaus,¹⁷⁸ A. A. Elliot,¹⁷²
N. Ellis,³² J. Elmsheuser,²⁷ M. Elsing,³² D. Emeliyanov,¹³³ Y. Enari,¹⁵⁷ O. C. Endner,⁸⁶ J. S. Ennis,¹⁷³ J. Erdmann,⁴⁶
A. Ereditato,¹⁸ M. Ernst,²⁷ S. Errede,¹⁶⁹ M. Escalier,¹¹⁹ C. Escobar,¹⁷⁰ B. Esposito,⁵⁰ O. Estrada Pastor,¹⁷⁰ A. I. Etienne,¹³⁸
E. Etzion,¹⁵⁵ H. Evans,⁶⁴ A. Ezhilov,¹²⁵ M. Ezzi,¹³⁷e F. Fabbri,²²a,²²b L. Fabbri,²²a,²²b V. Fabiani,¹⁰⁸ G. Facini,⁸¹
R. M. Fakhrutdinov,¹³² S. Falciano,¹³⁴a R. J. Falla,⁸¹ J. Faltova,³² Y. Fang,³⁵a M. Fanti,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b A. Farbin,⁸ A. Farilla,¹³⁶a
C. Farina,¹²⁷ E. M. Farina,¹²³a,¹²³b T. Farooque,⁹³ S. Farrell,¹⁶ S. M. Farrington,¹⁷³ P. Farthouat,³² F. Fassi,¹³⁷e P. Fassnacht,³²
D. Fassouliotis,⁹ M. Faucci Giannelli,⁸⁰ A. Favareto,⁵³a,⁵³b W. J. Fawcett,¹²² L. Fayard,¹¹⁹ O. L. Fedin,¹²⁵,r W. Fedorko,¹⁷¹
S. Feigl,¹²¹ L. Feligioni,⁸⁸ C. Feng,³⁶b E. J. Feng,³² H. Feng,⁹² M. J. Fenton,⁵⁶ A. B. Fenyuk,¹³² L. Feremenga,⁸
P. Fernandez Martinez,¹⁷⁰ S. Fernandez Perez,¹³ J. Ferrando,⁴⁵ A. Ferrari,¹⁶⁸ P. Ferrari,¹⁰⁹ R. Ferrari,¹²³a
D. E. Ferreira de Lima,⁶⁰b A. Ferrer,¹⁷⁰ D. Ferrere,⁵² C. Ferretti,⁹² F. Fiedler,⁸⁶ A. Filipčič,⁷⁸ M. Filipuzzi,⁴⁵ F. Filthaut,¹⁰⁸
M. Fincke-Keeler,¹⁷² K. D. Finelli,¹⁵² M. C. N. Fiolhais,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸c,⁵ L. Fiorini,¹⁷⁰ A. Fischer,² C. Fischer,¹³ J. Fischer,¹⁷⁸
W. C. Fisher,⁹³ N. Flaschel,⁴⁵ I. Fleck,¹⁴³ P. Fleischmann,⁹² R. R. M. Fletcher,¹²⁴ T. Flick,¹⁷⁸ B. M. Flierl,¹⁰²
L. R. Flores Castillo,⁶²a M. J. Flowerdew,¹⁰³ G. T. Forcolin,⁸⁷ A. Formica,¹³⁸ F. A. Förster,¹³ A. Forti,⁸⁷ A. G. Foster,¹⁹
D. Fournier,¹¹⁹ H. Fox,⁷⁵ S. Fracchia,¹⁴¹ P. Francavilla,⁸³ M. Franchini,²²a,²²b S. Franchino,⁶⁰a D. Francis,³² L. Franconi,¹²¹
M. Franklin,⁵⁹ M. Frate,¹⁶⁶ M. Fraternali,¹²³a,¹²³b D. Freeborn,⁸¹ S. M. Fressard-Batraneanu,³² B. Freund,⁹⁷ D. Froidevaux,³²
J. A. Frost,¹²² C. Fukunaga,¹⁵⁸ T. Fusayasu,¹⁰⁴ J. Fuster,¹⁷⁰ C. Gabaldon,⁵⁸ O. Gabizon,¹⁵⁴ A. Gabrielli,²²a,²²b A. Gabrielli,¹⁶
G. P. Gach,⁴¹a S. Gadatsch,³² S. Gadomski,⁸⁰ G. Gagliardi,⁵³a,⁵³b L. G. Gagnon,⁹⁷ C. Galea,¹⁰⁸ B. Galhardo,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸c
E. J. Gallas,¹²² B. J. Gallop,¹³³ P. Gallus,¹³⁰ G. Galster,³⁹ K. K. Gan,¹¹³ S. Ganguly,³⁷ Y. Gao,⁷⁷ Y. S. Gao,¹⁴⁵,h
F. M. Garay Walls,⁴⁹ C. García,¹⁷⁰ J. E. García Navarro,¹⁷⁰ J. A. García Pascual,³⁵a M. Garcia-Sciveres,¹⁶ R. W. Gardner,³³
N. Garelli,¹⁴⁵ V. Garonne,¹²¹ A. Gascon Bravo,⁴⁵ K. Gasnikova,⁴⁵ C. Gatti,⁵⁰ A. Gaudiello,⁵³a,⁵³b G. Gaudio,¹²³a
I. L. Gavrilenko,⁹⁸ C. Gay,¹⁷¹ G. Gaycken,²³ E. N. Gazis,¹⁰ C. N. P. Gee,¹³³ J. Geisen,⁵⁷ M. Geisen,⁸⁶ M. P. Geisler,⁶⁰a
K. Gellerstedt,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b C. Gemme,⁵³a M. H. Genest,⁵⁸ C. Geng,⁹² S. Gentile,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b C. Gentsos,¹⁵⁶ S. George,⁸⁰
D. Gerbaudo,¹³ A. Gershon,¹⁵⁵ G. Geßner,⁴⁶ S. Ghasemi,¹⁴³ M. Ghneimat,²³ B. Giacobbe,²²a S. Giagu,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b
N. Giangiacomi,²²a,²²b P. Giannetti,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b S. M. Gibson,⁸⁰ M. Gignac,¹⁷¹ M. Gilchriese,¹⁶ D. Gillberg,³¹ G. Gilles,¹⁷⁸
D. M. Gingrich,³e N. Giokaris,⁹a M. P. Giordani,¹⁶⁷a,¹⁶⁷c F. M. Giorgi,²²a P. F. Giraud,¹³⁸ P. Giromini,⁵⁹ D. Giugni,⁹⁴a
F. Giuli,¹²² C. Giuliani,¹⁰³ M. Giulini,⁶⁰b B. K. Gjelsten,¹²¹ S. Gkaitatzis,¹⁵⁶ I. Gkialas,⁹t E. L. Gkougkousis,¹³⁹
P. Gkountoumis,¹⁰ L. K. Gladilin,¹⁰¹ C. Glasman,⁸⁵ J. Glatzer,¹³ P. C. F. Glaysher,⁴⁵ A. Glazov,⁴⁵ M. Goblirsch-Kolb,²⁵
J. Godlewski,⁴² S. Goldfarb,⁹¹ T. Golling,⁵² D. Golubkov,¹³² A. Gomes,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b,¹²⁸d R. Gonçalo,¹²⁸a R. Goncalves Gama,²⁶a
J. Goncalves Pinto Firmino Da Costa,¹³⁸ G. Gonella,⁵¹ L. Gonella,¹⁹ A. Gongadze,⁶⁸ S. González de la Hoz,¹⁷⁰
S. Gonzalez-Sevilla,⁵² L. Goossens,³² P. A. Gorbounov,⁹⁹ H. A. Gordon,²⁷ I. Gorelov,¹⁰⁷ B. Gorini,³² E. Gorini,⁷⁶a,⁷⁶b
A. Gorišek,⁷⁸ A. T. Goshaw,⁴⁸ C. Gössling,⁴⁶ M. I. Gostkin,⁶⁸ C. A. Gottardo,²³ C. R. Goudet,¹¹⁹ D. Goujdami,¹³⁷c
A. G. Goussiou,¹⁴⁰ N. Govender,¹⁴⁷b,⁰ E. Gozani,¹⁵⁴ L. Graber,⁵⁷ I. Grabowska-Bold,⁴¹a P. O. J. Gradin,¹⁶⁸ J. Gramling,¹⁶⁶
E. Gramstad,¹²¹ S. Grancagnolo,¹⁷ V. Gratchev,¹²⁵ P. M. Gravila,²⁸f C. Gray,⁵⁶ H. M. Gray,¹⁶ Z. D. Greenwood,⁸²v
C. Grefe,²³ K. Gregersen,⁸¹ I. M. Gregor,⁴⁵ P. Grenier,¹⁴⁵ K. Grevtsov,⁵ J. Griffiths,⁸ A. A. Grillo,¹³⁹ K. Grimm,⁷⁵
S. Grinstein,¹³,w Ph. Gris,³⁷ J.-F. Grivaz,¹¹⁹ S. Groh,⁸⁶ E. Gross,¹⁷⁵ J. Grosse-Knetter,⁵⁷ G. C. Grossi,⁸² Z. J. Grout,⁸¹
A. Grummer,¹⁰⁷ L. Guan,⁹² W. Guan,¹⁷⁶ J. Guenther,⁶⁵ F. Guescini,¹⁶³a D. Guest,¹⁶⁶ O. Gueta,¹⁵⁵ B. Gui,¹¹³ E. Guido,⁵³a,⁵³b
T. Guillemin,⁵ S. Guindon,² U. Gul,⁵⁶ C. Gumpert,³² J. Guo,³⁶c W. Guo,⁹² Y. Guo,³⁶a R. Gupta,⁴³ S. Gupta,¹²²
G. Gustavino,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b P. Gutierrez,¹¹⁵ N. G. Gutierrez Ortiz,⁸¹ C. Gutschow,⁸¹ C. Guyot,¹³⁸ M. P. Guzik,⁴¹a C. Gwenlan,¹²²
C. B. Gwilliam,⁷⁷ A. Haas,¹¹² C. Haber,¹⁶ H. K. Hadavand,⁸ N. Haddad,¹³⁷e A. Hadef,⁸⁸ S. Hageböck,²³ M. Hagihara,¹⁶⁴
H. Hakobyan,¹⁸⁰,a M. Haleem,⁴⁵ J. Haley,¹¹⁶ G. Halladjian,⁹³ G. D. Hallewell,⁸⁸ K. Hamacher,¹⁷⁸ P. Hamal,¹¹⁷
K. Hamano,¹⁷² A. Hamilton,¹⁴⁷a G. N. Hamity,¹⁴¹ P. G. Hamnett,⁴⁵ L. Han,³⁶a S. Han,³⁵a K. Hanagaki,⁶⁹,x K. Hanawa,¹⁵⁷
M. Hance,¹³⁹ B. Haney,¹²⁴ P. Hanke,⁶⁰a J. B. Hansen,³⁹ J. D. Hansen,³⁹ M. C. Hansen,²³ P. H. Hansen,³⁹ K. Hara,¹⁶⁴
A. S. Hard,¹⁷⁶ T. Harenberg,¹⁷⁸ F. Hariri,¹¹⁹ S. Harkusha,⁹⁵ R. D. Harrington,⁴⁹ P. F. Harrison,¹⁷³ N. M. Hartmann,¹⁰²
M. Hasegawa,⁷⁰ Y. Hasegawa,¹⁴² A. Hasib,⁴⁹ S. Hassani,¹³⁸ S. Haug,¹⁸ R. Hauser,⁹³ L. Hauswald,⁴⁷ L. B. Havener,³⁸
M. Havranek,¹³⁰ C. M. Hawkes,¹⁹ R. J. Hawkings,³² D. Hayakawa,¹⁵⁹ D. Hayden,⁹³ C. P. Hays,¹²² J. M. Hays,⁷⁹
H. S. Hayward,⁷⁷ S. J. Haywood,¹³³ S. J. Head,¹⁹ T. Heck,⁸⁶ V. Hedberg,⁸⁴ L. Heelan,⁸ S. Heer,²³ K. K. Heidegger,⁵¹
S. Heim,⁴⁵ T. Heim,¹⁶ B. Heinemann,⁴⁵,y J. J. Heinrich,¹⁰² L. Heinrich,¹¹² C. Heinz,⁵⁵ J. Hejbal,¹²⁹ L. Helary,³² A. Held,¹⁷¹
S. Hellman,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b C. Helsens,³² R. C. W. Henderson,⁷⁵ Y. Heng,¹⁷⁶ S. Henkelmann,¹⁷¹ A. M. Henriques Correia,³²
S. Henrot-Versille,¹¹⁹ G. H. Herbert,¹⁷ H. Herde,²⁵ V. Herget,¹⁷⁷ Y. Hernández Jiménez,¹⁴⁷c H. Herr,⁸⁶ G. Herten,⁵¹
R. Hertenberger,¹⁰² L. Hervas,³² T. C. Herwig,¹²⁴ G. G. Hesketh,⁸¹ N. P. Hessey,¹⁶³a J. W. Hetherly,⁴³ S. Higashino,⁶⁹
E. Higón-Rodriguez,¹⁷⁰ K. Hildebrand,³³ E. Hill,¹⁷² J. C. Hill,³⁰ K. H. Hiller,⁴⁵ S. J. Hillier,¹⁹ M. Hils,⁴⁷ I. Hinchliffe,¹⁶
M. Hirose,⁵¹ D. Hirschbuehl,¹⁷⁸ B. Hiti,⁷⁸ O. Hladik,¹²⁹ X. Hoad,⁴⁹ J. Hobbs,¹⁵⁰ N. Hod,¹⁶³a M. C. Hodgkinson,¹⁴¹
P. Hodgson,¹⁴¹ A. Hoecker,³² M. R. Hoeferkamp,¹⁰⁷ F. Hoenig,¹⁰² D. Hohn,²³ T. R. Holmes,³³ M. Homann,⁴⁶ S. Honda,¹⁶⁴
T. Honda,⁶⁹ T. M. Hong,¹²⁷ B. H. Hooberman,¹⁶⁹ W. H. Hopkins,¹¹⁸ Y. Horii,¹⁰⁵ A. J. Horton,¹⁴⁴ J.-Y. Hostachy,⁵⁸ S. Hou,¹⁵³
A. Hoummada,¹³⁷a J. Howarth,⁸⁷ J. Hoya,⁷⁴ M. Hrabovsky,¹¹⁷ J. Hrdinka,³² I. Hristova,¹⁷ J. Krivnac,¹¹⁹ T. Hryn’ova,⁵
A. Hrynevich,⁹⁶ P. J. Hsu,⁶³ S.-C. Hsu,¹⁴⁰ Q. Hu,³⁶a S. Hu,³⁶c Y. Huang,³⁵a Z. Hubacek,¹³⁰ F. Hubaut,⁸⁸ F. Huegging,²³
T. B. Huffman,¹²² E. W. Hughes,³⁸ G. Hughes,⁷⁵ M. Huhtinen,³² P. Huo,¹⁵⁰ N. Huseynov,⁶⁸,c J. Huston,⁹³ J. Huth,⁵⁹
G. Iacobucci,⁵² G. Iakovidis,²⁷ I. Ibragimov,¹⁴³ L. Iconovidou-Fayard,¹¹⁹ Z. Idrissi,¹³⁷e P. Iengo,³² O. Igonkina,¹⁰⁹,z
T. Iizawa,¹⁷⁴ Y. Ikegami,⁶⁹ M. Ikeno,⁶⁹ Y. Ilchenko,¹¹,aa D. Iliadis,¹⁵⁶ N. Ilic,¹⁴⁵ G. Introzzi,¹²³a,¹²³b P. Ioannou,⁹,a
M. Iodice,¹³⁶a K. Iordanidou,³⁸ V. Ippolito,⁵⁹ M. F. Isacson,¹⁶⁸ N. Ishijima,¹²⁰ M. Ishino,¹⁵⁷ M. Ishitsuka,¹⁵⁹ C. Issever,¹²²
S. Istin,²⁰a F. Ito,¹⁶⁴ J. M. Iturbe Ponce,⁶²a R. Iuppa,¹⁶²a,¹⁶²b H. Iwasaki,⁶⁹ J. M. Izen,⁴⁴ V. Izzo,¹⁰⁶a S. Jabbar,³ P. Jackson,¹
R. M. Jacobs,²³ V. Jain,² K. B. Jakobi,⁸⁶ K. Jakobs,⁵¹ S. Jakobsen,⁶⁵ T. Jakoubek,¹²⁹ D. O. Jamin,¹¹⁶ D. K. Jana,⁸²
R. Jansky,⁵² J. Janssen,²³ M. Janus,⁵⁷ P. A. Janus,⁴¹a G. Jarlskog,⁸⁴ N. Javadov,⁶⁸,c T. Javūrek,⁵¹ M. Javurkova,⁵¹
F. Jeanneau,¹³⁸ L. Jeanty,¹⁶ J. Jejelava,⁵⁴a,bb A. Jelinskas,¹⁷³ P. Jenni,⁵¹,cc C. Jeske,¹⁷³ S. Jézéquel,⁵ H. Ji,¹⁷⁶ J. Jia,¹⁵⁰
H. Jiang,⁶⁷ Y. Jiang,³⁶a Z. Jiang,¹⁴⁵ S. Jiggins,⁸¹ J. Jimenez Pena,¹⁷⁰ S. Jin,³⁵a A. Jinaru,²⁸b O. Jinnouchi,¹⁵⁹ H. Jivan,¹⁴⁷c
P. Johansson,¹⁴¹ K. A. Johns,⁷ C. A. Johnson,⁶⁴ W. J. Johnson,¹⁴⁰ K. Jon-And,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b R. W. L. Jones,⁷⁵ S. D. Jones,¹⁵¹
S. Jones,⁷ T. J. Jones,⁷⁷ J. Jongmanns,⁶⁰a P. M. Jorge,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b J. Jovicevic,¹⁶³a X. Ju,¹⁷⁶ A. Juste Rozas,¹³,w M. K. Köhler,¹⁷⁵
A. Kaczmarska,⁴² M. Kado,¹¹⁹ H. Kagan,¹¹³ M. Kagan,¹⁴⁵ S. J. Kahn,⁸⁸ T. Kaji,¹⁷⁴ E. Kajomovitz,⁴⁸ C. W. Kalderon,⁸⁴
A. Kaluza,⁸⁶ S. Kama,⁴³ A. Kamenschikov,¹³² N. Kanaya,¹⁵⁷ L. Kanjir,⁷⁸ V. A. Kantserov,¹⁰⁰ J. Kanzaki,⁶⁹ B. Kaplan,¹¹²
L. S. Kaplan,¹⁷⁶ D. Kar,¹⁴⁷c K. Karakostas,¹⁰ N. Karastathis,¹⁰ M. J. Kareem,⁵⁷ E. Karentzos,¹⁰ S. N. Karpov,⁶⁸
Z. M. Karpova,⁶⁸ K. Karthik,¹¹² V. Kartvelishvili,⁷⁵ A. N. Karyukhin,¹³² K. Kasahara,¹⁶⁴ L. Kashif,¹⁷⁶ R. D. Kass,¹¹³
A. Kastanas,¹⁴⁹ Y. Kataoka,¹⁵⁷ C. Kato,¹⁵⁷ A. Katre,⁵² J. Katzy,⁴⁵ K. Kawade,⁷⁰ K. Kawagoe,⁷³ T. Kawamoto,¹⁵⁷
G. Kawamura,⁵⁷ E. F. Kay,⁷⁷ V. F. Kazanin,¹¹¹,d R. Keeler,¹⁷² R. Kehoe,⁴³ J. S. Keller,³¹ J. J. Kempster,⁸⁰ J. Kendrick,¹⁹
H. Keoshkerian,¹⁶¹ O. Kepka,¹²⁹ B. P. Kerševan,⁷⁸ S. Kersten,¹⁷⁸ R. A. Keyes,⁹⁰ M. Khader,¹⁶⁹ F. Khalil-zada,¹²
A. Khanov,¹¹⁶ A. G. Kharlamov,¹¹¹,d T. Kharlamova,¹¹¹,d A. Khodinov,¹⁶⁰ T. J. Khoo,⁵² V. Khovanskiy,⁹⁹,a E. Khramov,⁶⁸
J. Khubua,⁵⁴b,dd S. Kido,⁷⁰ C. R. Kilby,⁸⁰ H. Y. Kim,⁸ S. H. Kim,¹⁶⁴ Y. K. Kim,³³ N. Kimura,¹⁵⁶ O. M. Kind,¹⁷ B. T. King,⁷⁷
D. Kirchmeier,⁴⁷ J. Kirk,¹³³ A. E. Kiryunin,¹⁰³ T. Kishimoto,¹⁵⁷ D. Kisielewska,⁴¹a V. Kitali,⁴⁵ K. Kiuchi,¹⁶⁴ O. Kivernyk,⁵
E. Kladiva,¹⁴⁶b T. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus,⁵¹ M. H. Klein,³⁸ M. Klein,⁷⁷ U. Klein,⁷⁷ K. Kleinknecht,⁸⁶ P. Klimek,¹¹⁰
A. Klimentov,²⁷ R. Klingenberg,⁴⁶ T. Klingl,²³ T. Klioutchnikova,³² E.-E. Kluge,⁶⁰a P. Kluit,¹⁰⁹ S. Kluth,¹⁰³ E. Kneringer,⁶⁵
E. B. F. G. Knoops,⁸⁸ A. Knue,¹⁰³ A. Kobayashi,¹⁵⁷ D. Kobayashi,¹⁵⁹ T. Kobayashi,¹⁵⁷ M. Kobel,⁴⁷ M. Kocian,¹⁴⁵
P. Kodys,¹³¹ T. Koffas,³¹ E. Koffeman,¹⁰⁹ N. M. Köhler,¹⁰³ T. Koi,¹⁴⁵ M. Kolb,⁶⁰b I. Koletsou,⁵ A. A. Komar,⁹⁸,a
Y. Komori,¹⁵⁷ T. Kondo,⁶⁹ N. Kondrashova,³⁶c K. Köneke,⁵¹ A. C. König,¹⁰⁸ T. Kono,⁶⁹,ee R. Konoplich,¹¹²,ff
N. Konstantinidis,⁸¹ R. Kopeliansky,⁶⁴ S. Koperny,⁴¹a A. K. Kopp,⁵¹ K. Korcyl,⁴² K. Kordas,¹⁵⁶ A. Korn,⁸¹ A. A. Korol,¹¹¹,¹⁵

I. Korolkov,¹³ E. V. Korolkova,¹⁴¹ O. Kortner,¹⁰³ S. Kortner,¹⁰³ T. Kosek,¹³¹ V. V. Kostyukhin,²³ A. Kotwal,⁴⁸

A. Koulouris,¹⁰ A. Kourkoumeli-Charalampidi,¹²³a,¹²³b C. Kourkoumelis,⁹ E. Kourlitis,¹⁴¹ V. Kouskoura,²⁷

A. B. Kowalewska,⁴² R. Kowalewski,¹⁷² T. Z. Kowalski,⁴¹a C. Kozakai,¹⁵⁷ W. Kozanecki,¹³⁸ A. S. Kozhin,¹³²

V. A. Kramarenko,¹⁰¹ G. Kramberger,⁷⁸ D. Krasnopevtsev,¹⁰⁰ M. W. Krasny,⁸³ A. Krasznahorkay,³² D. Krauss,¹⁰³

J. A. Kremer,⁴¹a J. Kretzschmar,⁷⁷ K. Kreutzfeldt,⁵⁵ P. Krieger,¹⁶¹ K. Krizka,³³ K. Kroeninger,⁴⁶ H. Kroha,¹⁰³ J. Kroll,¹²⁹

J. Kroll,¹²⁴ J. Kroseberg,²³ J. Krstic,¹⁴ U. Kruchonak,⁶⁸ H. Krüger,²³ N. Krumnack,⁶⁷ M. C. Kruse,⁴⁸ T. Kubota,⁹¹

H. Kucuk,⁸¹ S. Kuday,⁴⁸ J. T. Kuechler,¹⁷⁸ S. Kuehn,³² A. Kugel,⁶⁰a F. Kuger,¹⁷⁷ T. Kuhl,⁴⁵ V. Kukhtin,⁶⁸ R. Kukla,⁸⁸

Y. Kulchitsky,⁹⁵ S. Kuleshov,³⁴b Y. P. Kulinich,¹⁶⁹ M. Kuna,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b T. Kunigo,⁷¹ A. Kupco,¹²⁹ T. Kupfer,⁴⁶ O. Kuprash,¹⁵⁵

H. Kurashige,⁷⁰ L. L. Kurchaninov,¹⁶³a Y. A. Kurochkin,⁹⁵ M. G. Kurth,³⁵a V. Kus,¹²⁹ E. S. Kuwertz,¹⁷² M. Kuze,¹⁵⁹

J. Kvita,¹¹⁷ T. Kwan,¹⁷² D. Kyriazopoulos,¹⁴¹ A. La Rosa,¹⁰³ J. L. La Rosa Navarro,²⁶d L. La Rotonda,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b

F. La Ruffa,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b C. Lacasta,¹⁷⁰ F. Lacava,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b J. Lacey,⁴⁵ H. Lacker,¹⁷ D. Lacour,⁸³ E. Ladygin,⁶⁸ R. Lafaye,⁵

B. Laforge,⁸³ T. Lagouri,¹⁷⁹ S. Lai,⁵⁷ S. Lammers,⁶⁴ W. Lampl,⁷ E. Lançon,²⁷ U. Landgraf,⁵¹ M. P. J. Landon,⁷⁹

M. C. Lanfermann,⁵² V. S. Lang,⁶⁰a J. C. Lange,¹³ R. J. Langenberg,³² A. J. Lankford,¹⁶⁶ F. Lanni,²⁷ K. Lantzsch,²³

A. Lanza,¹²³a A. Lapertosa,⁵³a,⁵³b S. Laplace,⁸³ J. F. Laporte,¹³⁸ T. Lari,⁹⁴a F. Lasagni Manghi,²²a,²²b M. Lassnig,³²

P. Laurelli,⁵⁰ W. Lavrijsen,¹⁶ A. T. Law,¹³⁹ P. Laycock,⁷⁷ T. Lazovich,⁵⁹ M. Lazzaroni,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b B. Le,⁹¹ O. Le Dortz,⁸³

E. Le Guirriec,⁸⁸ E. P. Le Quilleuc,¹³⁸ M. LeBlanc,¹⁷² T. LeCompte,⁶ F. Ledroit-Guillon,⁵⁸ C. A. Lee,²⁷ G. R. Lee,¹³³,gg

S. C. Lee,¹⁵³ L. Lee,⁵⁹ B. Lefebvre,⁹⁰ G. Lefebvre,⁸³ M. Lefebvre,¹⁷² F. Legger,¹⁰² C. Leggett,¹⁶ G. Lehmann Miotto,³²

X. Lei,⁷ W. A. Leight,⁴⁵ M. A. L. Leite,²⁶d R. Leitner,¹³¹ D. Lellouch,¹⁷⁵ B. Lemmer,⁵⁷ K. J. C. Leney,⁸¹ T. Lenz,²³

B. Lenzi,³² R. Leone,⁷ S. Leone,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b C. Leonidopoulos,⁴⁹ G. Lerner,¹⁵¹ C. Leroy,⁹⁷ A. A. J. Lesage,¹³⁸ C. G. Lester,³⁰

M. Levchenko,¹²⁵ J. Levêque,⁵ D. Levin,⁹² L. J. Levinson,¹⁷⁵ M. Levy,¹⁹ D. Lewis,⁷⁹ B. Li,³⁶a,hh Changqiao Li,³⁶a H. Li,¹⁵⁰

L. Li,³⁶c Q. Li,³⁵a S. Li,⁴⁸ X. Li,³⁶c Y. Li,¹⁴³ Z. Liang,³⁵a B. Liberti,¹³⁵a A. Liblong,¹⁶¹ K. Lie,⁶²c J. Liebal,²³ W. Liebig,¹⁵

A. Limosani,¹⁵² S. C. Lin,¹⁸² T. H. Lin,⁸⁶ B. E. Lindquist,¹⁵⁰ A. E. Lionti,⁵² E. Lipeles,¹²⁴ A. Lipniacka,¹⁵ M. Lisovyi,⁶⁰b

T. M. Liss,¹⁶⁹,ii A. Lister,¹⁷¹ A. M. Litke,¹³⁹ B. Liu,¹⁵³,ij H. Liu,⁹² H. Liu,²⁷ J. K. K. Liu,¹²² J. Liu,³⁶b J. B. Liu,³⁶a K. Liu,⁸⁸

L. Liu,¹⁶⁹ M. Liu,³⁶a Y. L. Liu,³⁶a Y. Liu,³⁶a M. Livan,¹²³a,¹²³b A. Lleres,⁵⁸ J. Llorente Merino,³⁵a S. L. Lloyd,⁷⁹ C. Y. Lo,⁶²b

F. Lo Sterzo,¹⁵³ E. M. Lobodzinska,⁴⁵ P. Loch,⁷ F. K. Loebinger,⁸⁷ A. Loesle,⁵¹ K. M. Loew,²⁵ A. Loginov,¹⁷⁹,ª T. Lohse,¹⁷

K. Lohwasser,¹⁴¹ M. Lokajicek,¹²⁹ B. A. Long,²⁴ J. D. Long,¹⁶⁹ R. E. Long,⁷⁵ L. Longo,⁷⁶a,⁷⁶b K. A. Looper,¹¹³

J. A. Lopez,³⁴b D. Lopez Mateos,⁵⁹ I. Lopez Paz,¹³ A. Lopez Solis,⁸³ J. Lorenz,¹⁰² N. Lorenzo Martinez,⁵ M. Losada,²¹

P. J. Lösel,¹⁰² X. Lou,³⁵a A. Lounis,¹¹⁹ J. Love,⁶ P. A. Love,⁷⁵ H. Lu,⁶²a N. Lu,⁹² Y. J. Lu,⁶³ H. J. Lubatti,¹⁴⁰ C. Luci,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b

A. Lucotte,⁵⁸ C. Luedtke,⁵¹ F. Luehring,⁶⁴ W. Lukas,⁶⁵ L. Luminari,¹³⁴a O. Lundberg,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b B. Lund-Jensen,¹⁴⁹

M. S. Lutz,⁸⁹ P. M. Luzi,⁸³ D. Lynn,²⁷ R. Lysak,¹²⁹ E. Lytken,⁸⁴ F. Lyu,³⁵a V. Lyubushkin,⁶⁸ H. Ma,²⁷ L. L. Ma,³⁶b Y. Ma,³⁶b

G. Maccarrone,⁵⁰ A. Macchiolo,¹⁰³ C. M. Macdonald,¹⁴¹ B. Maček,⁷⁸ J. Machado Miguens,¹²⁴,¹²⁸b D. Madaffari,¹⁷⁰

R. Madar,³⁷ W. F. Mader,⁴⁷ A. Madsen,⁴⁵ J. Maeda,⁷⁰ S. Maeland,¹⁵ T. Maeno,²⁷ A. S. Maevskiy,¹⁰¹ V. Magerl,⁵¹

J. Mahlstedt,¹⁰⁹ C. Maiani,¹¹⁹ C. Maidantchik,²⁶a A. A. Maier,¹⁰³ T. Maier,¹⁰² A. Maio,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b,¹²⁸d O. Majersky,¹⁴⁶a

S. Majewski,¹¹⁸ Y. Makida,⁶⁹ N. Makovec,¹¹⁹ B. Malaescu,⁸³ Pa. Malecki,⁴² V. P. Maleev,¹²⁵ F. Malek,⁵⁸ U. Mallik,⁶⁶

D. Malon,⁶ C. Malone,³⁰ S. Maltezos,¹⁰ S. Malyukov,³² J. Mamuzic,¹⁷⁰ G. Mancini,⁵⁰ I. Mandić,⁷⁸ J. Maneira,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b

L. Manhaes de Andrade Filho,²⁶b J. Manjarres Ramos,⁴⁷ K. H. Mankinen,⁸⁴ A. Mann,¹⁰² A. Manousos,³² B. Mansoulie,¹³⁸

J. D. Mansour,³⁵a R. Mantifel,⁹⁰ M. Mantoani,⁵⁷ S. Manzoni,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b L. Mapelli,³² G. Marceca,²⁹ L. March,⁵² L. Marchese,¹²²

G. Marchiori,⁸³ M. Marcisovsky,¹²⁹ M. Marjanovic,³⁷ D. E. Marley,⁹² F. Marroquim,²⁶a S. P. Marsden,⁸⁷ Z. Marshall,¹⁶

M. U. F. Martensson,¹⁶⁸ S. Marti-Garcia,¹⁷⁰ C. B. Martin,¹¹³ T. A. Martin,¹⁷³ V. J. Martin,⁴⁹ B. Martin dit Latour,¹⁵

M. Martinez,¹³,w V. I. Martinez Outschoorn,¹⁶⁹ S. Martin-Haugh,¹³³ V. S. Martoiu,²⁸b A. C. Martyniuk,⁸¹ A. Marzin,³²

L. Masetti,⁸⁶ T. Mashimo,¹⁵⁷ R. Mashinistov,⁹⁸ J. Masik,⁸⁷ A. L. Maslennikov,¹¹¹,¹⁵ L. Massa,¹³⁵a,¹³⁵b P. Mastrandrea,⁵

A. Mastroberardino,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b T. Masubuchi,¹⁵⁷ P. Mättig,¹⁷⁸ J. Maurer,²⁸b S. J. Maxfield,⁷⁷ D. A. Maximov,¹¹¹,¹⁵ R. Mazini,¹⁵³

I. Maznas,¹⁵⁶ S. M. Mazza,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b N. C. Mc Fadden,¹⁰⁷ G. Mc Goldrick,¹⁶¹ S. P. Mc Kee,⁹² A. McCarn,⁹² R. L. McCarthy,¹⁵⁰

T. G. McCarthy,¹⁰³ L. I. McClymont,⁸¹ E. F. McDonald,⁹¹ J. A. Mcfayden,⁸¹ G. Mchedlidze,⁵⁷ S. J. McMahon,¹³³

P. C. McNamara,⁹¹ R. A. McPherson,¹⁷²p S. Meehan,¹⁴⁰ T. J. Megy,⁵¹ S. Mehlhase,¹⁰² A. Mehta,⁷⁷ T. Meideck,⁵⁸

K. Meier,⁶⁰a B. Meirose,⁴⁴ D. Melini,¹⁷⁰,kk B. R. Mellado Garcia,¹⁴⁷c J. D. Mellenthin,⁵⁷ M. Melo,¹⁴⁶a F. Meloni,¹⁸

A. Melzer,²³ S. B. Menary,⁸⁷ L. Meng,⁷⁷ X. T. Meng,⁹² A. Mengarelli,²²a,²²b S. Menke,¹⁰³ E. Meoni,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b S. Mergelmeyer,¹⁷

P. Mermod,⁵² L. Merola,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b C. Meroni,⁹⁴a F. S. Merritt,³³ A. Messina,¹³⁴a,¹³⁴b J. Metcalfe,⁶ A. S. Mete,¹⁶⁶ C. Meyer,¹²⁴
J.-P. Meyer,¹³⁸ J. Meyer,¹⁰⁹ H. Meyer Zu Theenhausen,⁶⁰a F. Miano,¹⁵¹ R. P. Middleton,¹³³ S. Miglioranzi,⁵³a,⁵³b L. Mijović,⁴⁹
G. Mikenberg,¹⁷⁵ M. Mikestikova,¹²⁹ M. Mikuž,⁷⁸ M. Milesi,⁹¹ A. Milic,¹⁶¹ D. W. Miller,³³ C. Mills,⁴⁹ A. Milov,¹⁷⁵

D. A. Milstead,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b A. A. Minaenko,¹³² Y. Minami,¹⁵⁷ I. A. Minashvili,⁶⁸ A. I. Mincer,¹¹² B. Mindur,⁴¹a M. Mineev,⁶⁸

Y. Minegishi,¹⁵⁷ Y. Ming,¹⁷⁶ L. M. Mir,¹³ K. P. Mistry,¹²⁴ T. Mitani,¹⁷⁴ J. Mitrevski,¹⁰² V. A. Mitsou,¹⁷⁰ A. Miucci,¹⁸
P. S. Miyagawa,¹⁴¹ A. Mizukami,⁶⁹ J. U. Mjörnmark,⁸⁴ T. Mkrtchyan,¹⁸⁰ M. Mlynarikova,¹³¹ T. Moa,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b

K. Mochizuki,⁹⁷ P. Mogg,⁵¹ S. Mohapatra,³⁸ S. Molander,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b R. Moles-Valls,²³ R. Monden,⁷¹ M. C. Mondragon,⁹³

K. Mönig,⁴⁵ J. Monk,³⁹ E. Monnier,⁸⁸ A. Montalbano,¹⁵⁰ J. Montejo Berlingen,³² F. Monticelli,⁷⁴ S. Monzani,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b

R. W. Moore,³ N. Morange,¹¹⁹ D. Moreno,²¹ M. Moreno Llácer,³² P. Morettini,⁵³a S. Morgenstern,³² D. Mori,¹⁴⁴ T. Mori,¹⁵⁷
M. Morii,⁵⁹ M. Morinaga,¹⁵⁷ V. Morisbak,¹²¹ A. K. Morley,³² G. Mornacchi,³² J. D. Morris,⁷⁹ L. Morvaj,¹⁵⁰

P. Moschovakos,¹⁰ M. Mosidze,⁵⁴b H. J. Moss,¹⁴¹ J. Moss,¹⁴⁵,¹¹ K. Motohashi,¹⁵⁹ R. Mount,¹⁴⁵ E. Mountricha,²⁷

E. J. W. Moyse,⁸⁹ S. Muanza,⁸⁸ F. Mueller,¹⁰³ J. Mueller,¹²⁷ R. S. P. Mueller,¹⁰² D. Muenstermann,⁷⁵ P. Mullen,⁵⁶

G. A. Mullier,¹⁸ F. J. Munoz Sanchez,⁸⁷ W. J. Murray,¹⁷³,¹³³ H. Musheghyan,³² M. Mušinja,⁷⁸ A. G. Myagkov,¹³²,mm

M. Myska,¹³⁰ B. P. Nachman,¹⁶ O. Nackenhorst,⁵² K. Nagai,¹²² R. Nagai,⁶⁹,ee K. Nagano,⁶⁹ Y. Nagasaka,⁶¹ K. Nagata,¹⁶⁴

M. Nagel,⁵¹ E. Nagy,⁸⁸ A. M. Nairz,³² Y. Nakahama,¹⁰⁵ K. Nakamura,⁶⁹ T. Nakamura,¹⁵⁷ I. Nakano,¹¹⁴

R. F. Naranjo Garcia,⁴⁵ R. Narayan,¹¹ D. I. Narrias Villar,⁶⁰a I. Naryshkin,¹²⁵ T. Naumann,⁴⁵ G. Navarro,²¹ R. Nayyar,⁷

H. A. Neal,⁹² P. Yu. Nechaeva,⁹⁸ T. J. Neep,¹³⁸ A. Negri,¹²³a,¹²³b M. Negrini,²²a S. Nektarijevic,¹⁰⁸ C. Nellist,¹¹⁹ A. Nelson,¹⁶⁶

M. E. Nelson,¹²² S. Nemecek,¹²⁹ P. Nemethy,¹¹² M. Nessi,³²,nn M. S. Neubauer,¹⁶⁹ M. Neumann,¹⁷⁸ P. R. Newman,¹⁹

T. Y. Ng,⁶²c T. Nguyen Manh,⁹⁷ R. B. Nickerson,¹²² R. Nicolaidou,¹³⁸ J. Nielsen,¹³⁹ V. Nikolaenko,¹³²,mm I. Nikolic-Audit,⁸³

K. Nikolopoulos,¹⁹ J. K. Nilsen,¹²¹ P. Nilsson,²⁷ Y. Ninomiya,¹⁵⁷ A. Nisati,¹³⁴a N. Nishu,³⁵c R. Nisius,¹⁰³ I. Nitsche,⁴⁶

T. Nitta,¹⁷⁴ T. Nobe,¹⁵⁷ Y. Noguchi,⁷¹ M. Nomachi,¹²⁰ I. Nomidis,³¹ M. A. Nomura,²⁷ T. Nooney,⁷⁹ M. Nordberg,³²

N. Norjoharuddeen,¹²² O. Novgorodova,⁴⁷ S. Nowak,¹⁰³ M. Nozaki,⁶⁹ L. Nozka,¹¹⁷ K. Ntekas,¹⁶⁶ E. Nurse,⁸¹ F. Nuti,⁹¹

K. O'connor,²⁵ D. C. O'Neil,¹⁴⁴ A. A. O'Rourke,⁴⁵ V. O'Shea,⁵⁶ F. G. Oakham,³¹,ε H. Oberlack,¹⁰³ T. Obermann,²³

J. Ocariz,⁸³ A. Ochi,⁷⁰ I. Ochoa,³⁸ J. P. Ochoa-Ricoux,³⁴a S. Oda,⁷³ S. Odaka,⁶⁹ A. Oh,⁸⁷ S. H. Oh,⁴⁸ C. C. Ohm,¹⁶

H. Ohman,¹⁶⁸ H. Oide,⁵³a,⁵³b H. Okawa,¹⁶⁴ Y. Okumura,¹⁵⁷ T. Okuyama,⁶⁹ A. Olariu,²⁸b L. F. Oleiro Seabra,¹²⁸a

S. A. Olivares Pino,³⁴a D. Oliveira Damazio,²⁷ A. Olszewski,⁴² J. Olszowska,⁴² A. Onofre,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸e K. Onogi,¹⁰⁵

P. U. E. Onyisi,¹¹,aa H. Oppen,¹²¹ M. J. Oreglia,³³ Y. Oren,¹⁵⁵ D. Orestano,¹³⁶a,¹³⁶b N. Orlando,⁶²b R. S. Orr,¹⁶¹

B. Osculati,⁵³a,⁵³b,a R. Ospanov,³⁶a G. Otero y Garzon,²⁹ H. Otono,⁷³ M. Ouchrif,¹³⁷d F. Ould-Saada,¹²¹ A. Ouraou,¹³⁸

K. P. Oussoren,¹⁰⁹ Q. Ouyang,³⁵a M. Owen,⁵⁶ R. E. Owen,¹⁹ V. E. Ozcan,²⁰a N. Ozturk,⁸ K. Pachal,¹⁴⁴ A. Pacheco Pages,¹³

L. Pacheco Rodriguez,¹³⁸ C. Padilla Aranda,¹³ S. Pagan Griso,¹⁶ M. Paganini,¹⁷⁹ F. Paige,²⁷ G. Palacino,⁶⁴ S. Palazzo,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b

S. Palestini,³² M. Palka,⁴¹b D. Pallin,³⁷ E. St. Panagiotopoulou,¹⁰ I. Panagoulias,¹⁰ C. E. Pandini,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b

J. G. Panduro Vazquez,⁸⁰ P. Pani,³² S. Panitkin,²⁷ D. Pantea,²⁸b L. Paolozzi,⁵² Th. D. Papadopoulou,¹⁰ K. Papageorgiou,⁹,¹

A. Paramonov,⁶ D. Paredes Hernandez,¹⁷⁹ A. J. Parker,⁷⁵ M. A. Parker,³⁰ K. A. Parker,⁴⁵ F. Parodi,⁵³a,⁵³b J. A. Parsons,³⁸

U. Parzefall,⁵¹ V. R. Pascuzzi,¹⁶¹ J. M. Pasner,¹³⁹ E. Pasqualucci,¹³⁴a S. Passaggio,⁵³a Fr. Pastore,⁸⁰ S. Pataraia,⁸⁶ J. R. Pater,⁸⁷

T. Pauly,³² B. Pearson,¹⁰³ S. Pedraza Lopez,¹⁷⁰ R. Pedro,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b S. V. Peleganchuk,¹¹¹, d O. Penc,¹²⁹ C. Peng,³⁵a H. Peng,³⁶a

J. Penwell,⁶⁴ B. S. Peralva,²⁶b M. M. Perego,¹³⁸ D. V. Perepelitsa,²⁷ F. Peri,¹⁷ L. Perini,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b H. Pernegger,³²

S. Perrella,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b R. Peschke,⁴⁵ V. D. Peshekhonov,⁶⁸a K. Peters,⁴⁵ R. F. Y. Peters,⁸⁷ B. A. Petersen,³² T. C. Petersen,³⁹

E. Petit,⁵⁸ A. Petridis,¹ C. Petridou,¹⁵⁶ P. Petroff,¹¹⁹ E. Petrolo,¹³⁴a M. Petrov,¹²² F. Petrucci,¹³⁶a,¹³⁶b N. E. Pettersson,⁸⁹

A. Peyaud,¹³⁸ R. Pezoa,³⁴b F. H. Phillips,⁹³ P. W. Phillips,¹³³ G. Piacquadio,¹⁵⁰ E. Pianori,¹⁷³ A. Picazio,⁸⁹ E. Piccaro,⁷⁹

M. A. Pickering,¹²² R. Piegaia,²⁹ J. E. Pilcher,³³ A. D. Pilkington,⁸⁷ A. W. J. Pin,⁸⁷ M. Pinamonti,¹³⁵a,¹³⁵b J. L. Pinfold,³

H. Pirumov,⁴⁵ M. Pitt,¹⁷⁵ L. Plazak,¹⁴⁶a M.-A. Pleier,²⁷ V. Pleskot,⁶⁶ E. Plotnikova,⁶⁸ D. Pluth,⁶⁷ P. Podberezko,¹¹¹

R. Poettgen,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b R. Poggi,¹²³a,¹²³b L. Poggioli,¹¹⁹ D. Pohl,²³ G. Polesello,¹²³a A. Poley,⁴⁵ A. Policicchio,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b

R. Polifka,³² A. Polini,²²a C. S. Pollard,⁵⁶ V. Polychronakos,²⁷ K. Pommès,³² D. Ponomarenko,¹⁰⁰ L. Pontecorvo,¹³⁴a

G. A. Popeneciu,²⁸d A. Poppleton,³² S. Pospisil,¹³⁰ K. Potamianos,¹⁶ I. N. Potrap,⁶⁸ C. J. Potter,³⁰ G. Poulard,³² T. Poulsen,⁸⁴

J. Poveda,³² M. E. Pozo Astigarraga,³² P. Pralavorio,⁸⁸ A. Pranko,¹⁶ S. Prell,⁶⁷ D. Price,⁸⁷ M. Primavera,⁷⁶a S. Prince,⁹⁰

N. Proklova,¹⁰⁰ K. Prokofiev,⁶²c F. Prokoshin,³⁴b S. Protopopescu,²⁷ J. Proudfoot,⁶ M. Przybycien,⁴¹a A. Puri,¹⁶⁹ P. Puzo,¹¹⁹

J. Qian,⁹² G. Qin,⁵⁶ Y. Qin,⁸⁷ A. Quadt,⁵⁷ M. Queitsch-Maitland,⁴⁵ D. Quilty,⁵⁶ S. Raddum,¹²¹ V. Radeka,²⁷ V. Radescu,¹²²

S. K. Radhakrishnan,¹⁵⁰ P. Radloff,¹¹⁸ P. Rados,⁹¹ F. Ragusa,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b G. Rahal,¹⁸¹ J. A. Raine,⁸⁷ S. Rajagopalan,²⁷

C. Rangel-Smith,¹⁶⁸ T. Rashid,¹¹⁹ S. Raspopov,⁵ M. G. Ratti,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b D. M. Rauch,⁴⁵ F. Rauscher,¹⁰² S. Rave,⁸⁶

I. Ravinovich,¹⁷⁵ J. H. Rawling,⁸⁷ M. Raymond,³² A. L. Read,¹²¹ N. P. Readioff,⁵⁸ M. Reale,⁷⁶a,⁷⁶b D. M. Rebuzzi,¹²³a,¹²³b
A. Redelbach,¹⁷⁷ G. Redlinger,²⁷ R. Reece,¹³⁹ R. G. Reed,¹⁴⁷c K. Reeves,⁴⁴ L. Rehnisch,¹⁷ J. Reichert,¹²⁴ A. Reiss,⁸⁶ C. Rembser,³² H. Ren,³⁵a M. Rescigno,¹³⁴a S. Resconi,⁹⁴a E. D. Resseguie,¹²⁴ S. Rettie,¹⁷¹ E. Reynolds,¹⁹

O. L. Rezanova,¹¹¹, d P. Reznicek,¹³¹ R. Rezvani,⁹⁷ R. Richter,¹⁰³ S. Richter,⁸¹ E. Richter-Was,⁴¹b O. Ricken,²³ M. Ridel,⁸³

P. Rieck,¹⁰³ C. J. Riegel,¹⁷⁸ J. Rieger,⁵⁷ O. Rifki,¹¹⁵ M. Rijssenbeek,¹⁵⁰ A. Rimoldi,¹²³a,¹²³b M. Rimoldi,¹⁸ L. Rinaldi,²²a G. Ripellino,¹⁴⁹ B. Ristić,³² E. Ritsch,³² I. Riu,¹³ F. Rizatdinova,¹¹⁶ E. Rizvi,⁷⁹ C. Rizzi,¹³ R. T. Roberts,⁸⁷ S. H. Robertson,⁹⁰,p A. Robichaud-Veronneau,⁹⁰ D. Robinson,³⁰ J. E. M. Robinson,⁴⁵ A. Robson,⁵⁶ E. Rocco,⁸⁶

C. Roda,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b Y. Rodina,⁸⁸,oo S. Rodriguez Bosca,¹⁷⁰ A. Rodriguez Perez,¹³ D. Rodriguez Rodriguez,¹⁷⁰ S. Roe,³²

C. S. Rogan,⁵⁹ O. Røhne,¹²¹ J. Roloff,⁵⁹ A. Romaniouk,¹⁰⁰ M. Romano,²²a,²²b S. M. Romano Saez,³⁷ E. Romero Adam,¹⁷⁰

N. Rompotis,⁷⁷ M. Ronzani,⁵¹ L. Roos,⁸³ S. Rosati,¹³⁴a K. Rosbach,⁵¹ P. Rose,¹³⁹ N.-A. Rosien,⁵⁷ E. Rossi,¹⁰⁶a,¹⁰⁶b

L. P. Rossi,⁵³a J. H. N. Rosten,³⁰ R. Rosten,¹⁴⁰ M. Rotaru,²⁸b J. Rothberg,¹⁴⁰ D. Rousseau,¹¹⁹ A. Rozanov,⁸⁸ Y. Rozen,¹⁵⁴ X. Ruan,¹⁴⁷c F. Rubbo,¹⁴⁵ F. Rühr,⁵¹ A. Ruiz-Martinez,³¹ Z. Rurikova,⁵¹ N. A. Rusakovich,⁶⁸ H. L. Russell,⁹⁰

J. P. Rutherford,⁷ N. Ruthmann,³² Y. F. Ryabov,¹²⁵ M. Rybar,¹⁶⁹ G. Rybkin,¹¹⁹ S. Ryu,⁶ A. Ryzhov,¹³² G. F. Rzehorz,⁵⁷

A. F. Saavedra,¹⁵² G. Sabato,¹⁰⁹ S. Sacerdoti,²⁹ H. F.-W. Sadrozinski,¹³⁹ R. Sadykov,⁶⁸ F. Safai Tehrani,¹³⁴a P. Saha,¹¹⁰ M. Sahinsoy,⁶⁰a M. Saimpert,⁴⁵ M. Saito,¹⁵⁷ T. Saito,¹⁵⁷ H. Sakamoto,¹⁵⁷ Y. Sakurai,¹⁷⁴ G. Salamanna,¹³⁶a,¹³⁶b

J. E. Salazar Loyola,³⁴b D. Salek,¹⁰⁹ P. H. Sales De Bruin,¹⁶⁸ D. Salihagic,¹⁰³ A. Salnikov,¹⁴⁵ J. Salt,¹⁷⁰ D. Salvatore,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b

F. Salvatore,¹⁵¹ A. Salvucci,⁶²a,⁶²b,⁶²c A. Salzburger,³² D. Sammel,⁵¹ D. Sampsonidis,¹⁵⁶ D. Sampsonidou,¹⁵⁶ J. Sánchez,¹⁷⁰

V. Sanchez Martinez,¹⁷⁰ A. Sanchez Pineda,¹⁶⁷a,¹⁶⁷c H. Sandaker,¹²¹ R. L. Sandbach,⁷⁹ C. O. Sander,⁴⁵ M. Sandhoff,¹⁷⁸ C. Sandoval,²¹ D. P. C. Sankey,¹³³ M. Sannino,⁵³a,⁵³b Y. Sano,¹⁰⁵ A. Sansoni,⁵⁰ C. Santoni,³⁷ H. Santos,¹²⁸a

I. Santoyo Castillo,¹⁵¹ A. Sapronov,⁶⁸ J. G. Saraiva,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸d B. Sarrazin,²³ O. Sasaki,⁶⁹ K. Sato,¹⁶⁴ E. Sauvan,⁵ G. Savage,⁸⁰ P. Savard,¹⁶¹,e N. Savic,¹⁰³ C. Sawyer,¹³³ L. Sawyer,⁸²,v J. Saxon,³³ C. Sbarra,²²a A. Sbrizzi,²²a,²²b T. Scanlon,⁸¹

D. A. Scannicchio,¹⁶⁶ M. Scarcella,¹⁵² J. Schaarschmidt,¹⁴⁰ P. Schacht,¹⁰³ B. M. Schachtner,¹⁰² D. Schaefer,³² L. Schaefer,¹²⁴ R. Schaefer,⁴⁵ J. Schaeffer,⁸⁶ S. Schaepe,²³ S. Schaetzel,⁶⁰b U. Schäfer,⁸⁶ A. C. Schaffer,¹¹⁹ D. Schaile,¹⁰² R. D. Schamberger,¹⁵⁰ V. A. Schegelsky,¹²⁵ D. Scheirich,¹³¹ M. Schernau,¹⁶⁶ C. Schiavi,⁵³a,⁵³b S. Schier,¹³⁹ L. K. Schildgen,²³ C. Schillo,⁵¹ M. Schioppa,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b S. Schlenker,³² K. R. Schmidt-Sommerfeld,¹⁰³ K. Schmieden,³²

C. Schmitt,⁸⁶ S. Schmitt,⁴⁵ S. Schmitz,⁸⁶ U. Schnoor,⁵¹ L. Schoeffel,¹³⁸ A. Schoening,⁶⁰b B. D. Schoenrock,⁹³ E. Schopf,²³ M. Schott,⁸⁶ J. F. P. Schouwenberg,¹⁰⁸ J. Schovancova,³² S. Schramm,⁵² N. Schuh,⁸⁶ A. Schulte,⁸⁶ M. J. Schultens,²³ H.-C. Schultz-Coulon,⁶⁰a H. Schulz,¹⁷ M. Schumacher,⁵¹ B. A. Schumm,¹³⁹ Ph. Schune,¹³⁸ A. Schwartzman,¹⁴⁵

T. A. Schwarz,⁹² H. Schweiger,⁸⁷ Ph. Schwemling,¹³⁸ R. Schwienhorst,⁹³ J. Schwindling,¹³⁸ A. Sciandra,²³ G. Sciolla,²⁵

M. Scornajenghi,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b F. Scuri,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b F. Scutti,⁹¹ J. Searcy,⁹² P. Seema,²³ S. C. Seidel,¹⁰⁷ A. Seiden,¹³⁹ J. M. Seixas,²⁶a G. Sekhniaidze,¹⁰⁶a K. Sekhon,⁹² S. J. Sekula,⁴³ N. Semprini-Cesari,²²a,²²b S. Senkin,³⁷ C. Serfon,¹²¹ L. Serin,¹¹⁹

L. Serkin,¹⁶⁷a,¹⁶⁷b M. Sessa,¹³⁶a,¹³⁶b R. Seuster,¹⁷² H. Severini,¹¹⁵ T. Sfiligoj,⁷⁸ F. Sforza,³² A. Sfyrla,⁵² E. Shabalina,⁵⁷ N. W. Shaikh,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b L. Y. Shan,³⁵a R. Shang,¹⁶⁹ J. T. Shank,²⁴ M. Shapiro,¹⁶ P. B. Shatalov,⁹⁹ K. Shaw,¹⁶

S. M. Shaw,⁸⁷ A. Shcherbakova,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b C. Y. Shehu,¹⁵¹ Y. Shen,¹¹⁵ N. Sherafati,³¹ P. Sherwood,⁸¹ L. Shi,¹⁵³,pp S. Shimizu,⁷⁰ C. O. Shimmin,¹⁷⁹ M. Shimojima,¹⁰⁴ I. P. J. Shipsey,¹²² S. Shirabe,⁷³ M. Shiyakova,⁶⁸,qq J. Shlomi,¹⁷⁵ A. Shmeleva,⁹⁸

D. Shoaleh Saadi,⁹⁷ M. J. Shochet,³³ S. Shojaii,⁹⁴a D. R. Shope,¹¹⁵ S. Shrestha,¹¹³ E. Shulga,¹⁰⁰ M. A. Shupe,⁷ P. Sicho,¹²⁹

A. M. Sickles,¹⁶⁹ P. E. Sidebo,¹⁴⁹ E. Sideras Haddad,¹⁴⁷c O. Sidiropoulou,¹⁷⁷ A. Sidoti,²²a,²²b F. Siegert,⁴⁷ Dj. Sijacki,¹⁴

J. Silva,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸d S. B. Silverstein,¹⁴⁸a V. Simak,¹³⁰ Lj. Simic,¹⁴ S. Simion,¹¹⁹ E. Simioni,⁸⁶ B. Simmons,⁸¹ M. Simon,⁸⁶

P. Sinervo,¹⁶¹ N. B. Sinev,¹¹⁸ M. Sioli,²²a,²²b G. Siragusa,¹⁷⁷ I. Siral,⁹² S. Yu. Sivoklokov,¹⁰¹ J. Sjölin,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b M. B. Skinner,⁷⁵ P. Skubic,¹¹⁵ M. Slater,¹⁹ T. Slavicek,¹³⁰ M. Slawinska,⁴² K. Sliwa,¹⁶⁵ R. Slovak,¹³¹ V. Smakhtin,¹⁷⁵ B. H. Smart,⁵ J. Smiesko,¹⁴⁶a N. Smirnov,¹⁰⁰ S. Yu. Smirnov,¹⁰⁰ Y. Smirnov,¹⁰⁰ L. N. Smirnova,¹⁰¹,rr O. Smirnova,⁸⁴ J. W. Smith,⁵⁷ M. N. K. Smith,³⁸ R. W. Smith,³⁸ M. Smizanska,⁷⁵ K. Smolek,¹³⁰ A. A. Snesarev,⁹⁸ I. M. Snyder,¹¹⁸ S. Snyder,²⁷

R. Sobie,¹⁷²,p F. Socher,⁴⁷ A. Soffer,¹⁵⁵ A. Søgaard,⁴⁹ D. A. Soh,¹⁵³ G. Sokhrannyi,⁷⁸ C. A. Solans Sanchez,³² M. Solar,¹³⁰

E. Yu. Soldatov,¹⁰⁰ U. Soldevila,¹⁷⁰ A. A. Solodkov,¹³² A. Soloshenko,⁶⁸ O. V. Solovyanov,¹³² V. Solovyev,¹²⁵ P. Sommer,⁵¹

H. Son,¹⁶⁵ A. Sopczak,¹³⁰ D. Sosa,⁶⁰b C. L. Sotiropoulou,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b R. Soualah,¹⁶⁷a,¹⁶⁷c A. M. Soukharev,¹¹¹,d D. South,⁴⁵ B. C. Sowden,⁸⁰ S. Spagnolo,⁷⁶a,⁷⁶b M. Spalla,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b M. Spangenberg,¹⁷³ F. Spanò,⁸⁰ D. Sperlich,¹⁷ F. Spettel,¹⁰³

T. M. Spieker,⁶⁰a R. Spighi,²²a G. Spigo,³² L. A. Spiller,⁹¹ M. Spousta,¹³¹ R. D. St. Denis,⁵⁶,a A. Stabile,⁹⁴a R. Stamen,⁶⁰a S. Stamm,¹⁷ E. Stanecka,⁴² R. W. Stanek,⁶ C. Stanescu,¹³⁶a M. M. Stanitzki,⁴⁵ B. S. Stapf,¹⁰⁹ S. Stapnes,¹²¹

E. A. Starchenko,¹³² G. H. Stark,³³ J. Stark,⁵⁸ S. H. Stark,³⁹ P. Staroba,¹²⁹ P. Starovoitov,⁶⁰a S. Stärz,³² R. Staszewski,⁴² P. Steinberg,²⁷ B. Stelzer,¹⁴⁴ H. J. Stelzer,³² O. Stelzer-Chilton,¹⁶³a H. Stenzel,⁵⁵ G. A. Stewart,⁵⁶ M. C. Stockton,¹¹⁸
M. Stoebe,⁹⁰ G. Stoicea,²⁸b P. Stolte,⁵⁷ S. Stonjek,¹⁰³ A. R. Stradling,⁸ A. Straessner,⁴⁷ M. E. Stramaglia,¹⁸ J. Strandberg,¹⁴⁹ S. Strandberg,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b M. Strauss,¹¹⁵ P. Strizenec,¹⁴⁶b R. Ströhmer,¹⁷⁷ D. M. Strom,¹¹⁸ R. Stroynowski,⁴³ A. Strubig,⁴⁹ S. A. Stucci,²⁷ B. Stugu,¹⁵ N. A. Styles,⁴⁵ D. Su,¹⁴⁵ J. Su,¹²⁷ S. Suchek,⁶⁰a Y. Sugaya,¹²⁰ M. Suk,¹³⁰ V. V. Sulin,⁹⁸ DMS Sultan,¹⁶²a,¹⁶²b S. Sultansoy,⁴c T. Sumida,⁷¹ S. Sun,⁵⁹ X. Sun,³ K. Suruliz,¹⁵¹ C. J. E. Suster,¹⁵² M. R. Sutton,¹⁵¹ S. Suzuki,⁶⁹ M. Svatos,¹²⁹ M. Swiatlowski,³³ S. P. Swift,² I. Sykora,¹⁴⁶a T. Sykora,¹³¹ D. Ta,⁵¹ K. Tackmann,⁴⁵ J. Taenzer,¹⁵⁵ A. Taffard,¹⁶⁶ R. Tafirout,¹⁶³a N. Taiblum,¹⁵⁵ H. Takai,²⁷ R. Takashima,⁷² E. H. Takasugi,¹⁰³ T. Takeshita,¹⁴² Y. Takubo,⁶⁹ M. Talby,⁸⁸ A. A. Talyshev,¹¹¹d J. Tanaka,¹⁵⁷ M. Tanaka,¹⁵⁹ R. Tanaka,¹¹⁹ S. Tanaka,⁶⁹ R. Tanioka,⁷⁰ B. B. Tannenwald,¹¹³ S. Tapia Araya,³⁴b S. Tapprogge,⁸⁶ S. Tarem,¹⁵⁴ G. F. Tartarelli,⁹⁴a P. Tas,¹³¹ M. Tasevsky,¹²⁹ T. Tashiro,⁷¹ E. Tassi,⁴⁰a,⁴⁰b A. Tavares Delgado,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸b Y. Tayalati,¹³⁷e A. C. Taylor,¹⁰⁷ G. N. Taylor,⁹¹ P. T. E. Taylor,⁹¹ W. Taylor,¹⁶³b P. Teixeira-Dias,⁸⁰ D. Temple,¹⁴⁴ H. Ten Kate,³² P. K. Teng,¹⁵³ J. J. Teoh,¹²⁰ F. Tepel,¹⁷⁸ S. Terada,⁶⁹ K. Terashi,¹⁵⁷ J. Terron,⁸⁵ S. Terzo,¹³ M. Testa,⁵⁰ R. J. Teuscher,¹⁶¹p T. Theveneaux-Pelzer,⁸⁸ F. Thiele,³⁹ J. P. Thomas,¹⁹ J. Thomas-Wilsker,⁸⁰ P. D. Thompson,¹⁹ A. S. Thompson,⁵⁶ L. A. Thomsen,¹⁷⁹ E. Thomson,¹²⁴ M. J. Tibbetts,¹⁶ R. E. Ticse Torres,⁸⁸ V. O. Tikhomirov,⁹⁸,ss Yu. A. Tikhonov,¹¹¹d S. Timoshenko,¹⁰⁰ P. Tipton,¹⁷⁹ S. Tisserant,⁸⁸ K. Todome,¹⁵⁹ S. Todorova-Nova,⁵ S. Todt,⁴⁷ J. Tojo,⁷³ S. Tokár,¹⁴⁶a K. Tokushuku,⁶⁹ E. Tolley,⁵⁹ L. Tomlinson,⁸⁷ M. Tomoto,¹⁰⁵ L. Tompkins,¹⁴⁵tt K. Toms,¹⁰⁷ B. Tong,⁵⁹ P. Tornambe,⁵¹ E. Torrence,¹¹⁸ H. Torres,¹⁴⁴ E. Torró Pastor,¹⁴⁰ J. Toth,⁸⁸,uu F. Touchard,⁸⁸ D. R. Tovey,¹⁴¹ C. J. Treado,¹¹² T. Trefzger,¹⁷⁷ F. Tresoldi,¹⁵¹ A. Tricoli,²⁷ I. M. Trigger,¹⁶³a S. Trincaz-Duvoid,⁸³ M. F. Tripiana,¹³ W. Trischuk,¹⁶¹ B. Trocmé,⁵⁸ A. Trofymov,⁴⁵ C. Troncon,⁹⁴a M. Trottier-McDonald,¹⁶ M. Trovatelli,¹⁷² L. Truong,¹⁴⁷b M. Trzebinski,⁴² A. Trzupek,⁴² K. W. Tsang,⁶²a J. C.-L. Tseng,¹²² P. V. Tsiareshka,⁹⁵ G. Tsipolitis,¹⁰ N. Tsirintanis,⁹ S. Tsiskaridze,¹³ V. Tsiskaridze,⁵¹ E. G. Tskhadadze,⁵⁴a K. M. Tsui,⁶²a I. I. Tsukerman,⁹⁹ V. Tsulaia,¹⁶ S. Tsuno,⁶⁹ D. Tsybychev,¹⁵⁰ Y. Tu,⁶²b A. Tudorache,²⁸b V. Tudorache,²⁸b T. T. Tulbure,²⁸a A. N. Tuna,⁵⁹ S. A. Tupputi,²²a,²²b S. Turchikhin,⁶⁸ D. Turgeman,¹⁷⁵ I. Turk Cakir,⁴b,vv R. Turra,⁹⁴a P. M. Tuts,³⁸ G. Ucchielli,²²a,²²b I. Ueda,⁶⁹ M. Ughetto,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b F. Ukegawa,¹⁶⁴ G. Unal,³² A. Undrus,²⁷ G. Unel,¹⁶⁶ F. C. Ungaro,⁹¹ Y. Unno,⁶⁹ C. Unverdorben,¹⁰² J. Urban,¹⁴⁶b P. Urquijo,⁹¹ P. Urrejola,⁸⁶ G. Usai,⁸ J. Usui,⁶⁹ L. Vacavant,⁸⁸ V. Vacek,¹³⁰ B. Vachon,⁹⁰ K. O. H. Vadla,¹²¹ A. Vaidya,⁸¹ C. Valderanis,¹⁰² E. Valdes Santurio,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b S. Valentinetti,²²a,²²b A. Valero,¹⁷⁰ L. Valéry,¹³ S. Valkar,¹³¹ A. Vallier,⁵ J. A. Valls Ferrer,¹⁷⁰ W. Van Den Wollenberg,¹⁰⁹ H. van der Graaf,¹⁰⁹ P. van Gemmeren,⁶ J. Van Nieuwkoop,¹⁴⁴ I. van Vulpen,¹⁰⁹ M. C. van Woerden,¹⁰⁹ M. Vanadia,¹³⁵a,¹³⁵b W. Vandelli,³² A. Vaniachine,¹⁶⁰ P. Vankov,¹⁰⁹ G. Vardanyan,¹⁸⁰ R. Vari,¹³⁴a E. W. Varnes,⁷ C. Varni,⁵³a,⁵³b T. Varol,⁴³ D. Varouchas,¹¹⁹ A. Vartapetian,⁸ K. E. Varvell,¹⁵² J. G. Vasquez,¹⁷⁹ G. A. Vasquez,³⁴b F. Vazeille,³⁷ T. Vazquez Schroeder,⁹⁰ J. Veatch,⁵⁷ V. Veeraraghavan,⁷ L. M. Veloce,¹⁶¹ F. Veloso,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸c S. Veneziano,¹³⁴a A. Ventura,⁷⁶a,⁷⁶b M. Venturi,¹⁷² N. Venturi,³² A. Venturini,²⁵ V. Vercesi,¹²³a M. Verducci,¹³⁶a,¹³⁶b W. Verkerke,¹⁰⁹ A. T. Vermeulen,¹⁰⁹ J. C. Vermeulen,¹⁰⁹ M. C. Vetterli,¹⁴⁴e N. Viaux Maira,³⁴b O. Viazlo,⁸⁴ I. Vichou,¹⁶⁹,a T. Vickey,¹⁴¹ O. E. Vickey Boeriu,¹⁴¹ G. H. A. Viehhauser,¹²² S. Viel,¹⁶ L. Vigani,¹²² M. Villa,²²a,²²b M. Villaplaná Perez,⁹⁴a,⁹⁴b E. Vilucchi,⁵⁰ M. G. Vinčer,³¹ V. B. Vinogradov,⁶⁸ A. Vishwakarma,⁴⁵ C. Vittori,²²a,²²b I. Vivarelli,¹⁵¹ S. Vlachos,¹⁰ M. Vogel,¹⁷⁸ P. Vokac,¹³⁰ G. Volpi,¹²⁶a,¹²⁶b H. von der Schmitt,¹⁰³ E. von Toerne,²³ V. Vorobel,¹³¹ K. Vorobev,¹⁰⁰ M. Vos,¹⁷⁰ R. Voss,³² J. H. Vossebeld,⁷⁷ N. Vranjes,¹⁴ M. Vranjes Milosavljevic,¹⁴ V. Vrba,¹³⁰ M. Vreeswijk,¹⁰⁹ R. Vuillermet,³² I. Vukotic,³³ P. Wagner,²³ W. Wagner,¹⁷⁸ J. Wagner-Kuhr,¹⁰² H. Wahlberg,⁷⁴ S. Wahrmund,⁴⁷ J. Wakabayashi,¹⁰⁵ J. Walder,⁷⁵ R. Walker,¹⁰² W. Walkowiak,¹⁴³ V. Wallangen,¹⁴⁸a,¹⁴⁸b C. Wang,³⁵b C. Wang,³⁶b,ww F. Wang,¹⁷⁶ H. Wang,¹⁶ H. Wang,³ J. Wang,⁴⁵ J. Wang,¹⁵² Q. Wang,¹¹⁵ R.-J. Wang,⁸³ R. Wang,⁶ S. M. Wang,¹⁵³ T. Wang,³⁸ W. Wang,¹⁵³,xx W. Wang,³⁶a Z. Wang,³⁶c C. Wanotayaroj,¹¹⁸ A. Warburton,⁹⁰ C. P. Ward,³⁰ D. R. Wardrope,⁸¹ A. Washbrook,⁴⁹ P. M. Watkins,¹⁹ A. T. Watson,¹⁹ M. F. Watson,¹⁹ G. Watts,¹⁴⁰ S. Watts,⁸⁷ B. M. Waugh,⁸¹ A. F. Webb,¹¹ S. Webb,⁸⁶ M. S. Weber,¹⁸ S. W. Weber,¹⁷⁷ S. A. Weber,³¹ J. S. Webster,⁶ A. R. Weidberg,¹²² B. Weinert,⁶⁴ J. Weingarten,⁵⁷ M. Weirich,⁸⁶ C. Weiser,⁵¹ H. Weits,¹⁰⁹ P. S. Wells,³² T. Wenaus,²⁷ T. Wengler,³² S. Wenig,³² N. Wermes,²³ M. D. Werner,⁶⁷ P. Werner,³² M. Wessels,⁶⁰a K. Whalen,¹¹⁸ N. L. Whallon,¹⁴⁰ A. M. Wharton,⁷⁵ A. S. White,⁹² A. White,⁸ M. J. White,¹ R. White,³⁴b D. Whiteson,¹⁶⁶ B. W. Whitmore,⁷⁵ F. J. Wickens,¹³³ W. Wiedenmann,¹⁷⁶ M. Wielers,¹³³ C. Wiglesworth,³⁹ L. A. M. Wiik-Fuchs,⁵¹ A. Wildauer,¹⁰³ F. Wilk,⁸⁷ H. G. Wilkens,³² H. H. Williams,¹²⁴ S. Williams,¹⁰⁹ C. Willis,⁹³ S. Willocq,⁸⁹ J. A. Wilson,¹⁹ I. Wingerter-Seez,⁵ E. Winkels,¹⁵¹ F. Winklmeier,¹¹⁸ O. J. Winston,¹⁵¹ B. T. Winter,²³ M. Wittgen,¹⁴⁵ M. Wobisch,⁸²,v T. M. H. Wolf,¹⁰⁹ R. Wolff,⁸⁸ M. W. Wolter,⁴² H. Wolters,¹²⁸a,¹²⁸c V. W. S. Wong,¹⁷¹ S. D. Worm,¹⁹ B. K. Wosiek,⁴² J. Wotschack,³² K. W. Wozniak,⁴² M. Wu,³³ S. L. Wu,¹⁷⁶ X. Wu,⁵² Y. Wu,⁹² T. R. Wyatt,⁸⁷ B. M. Wynne,⁴⁹ S. Xella,³⁹ Z. Xi,⁹² L. Xia,³⁵c D. Xu,³⁵a L. Xu,²⁷ T. Xu,¹³⁸ B. Yabsley,¹⁵² S. Yacoob,¹⁴⁷a D. Yamaguchi,¹⁵⁹ Y. Yamaguchi,¹²⁰
A. Yamamoto,⁶⁹ S. Yamamoto,¹⁵⁷ T. Yamanaka,¹⁵⁷ M. Yamatani,¹⁵⁷ K. Yamauchi,¹⁰⁵ Y. Yamazaki,⁷⁰ Z. Yan,<fnref n="24" /> H. Yang,³⁶ᶜ

H. Yang,<fnref n="16" /> Y. Yang,¹⁵³ Z. Yang,<fnref n="15" /> W-M. Yao,<fnref n="16" /> Y. C. Yap,⁸³ Y. Yasu,⁶⁹ E. Yatsenko,<fnref n="5" /> K. H. Yau Wong,<fnref n="23" /> J. Ye,⁴³ S. Ye,<fnref n="27" />

I. Yeletskikh,⁶⁸ E. Yigitbasi,<fnref n="24" /> E. Yildirim,⁸⁶ K. Yorita,¹⁷⁴ K. Yoshihara,¹²⁴ C. Young,¹⁴⁵ C. J. S. Young,³² J. Yu,<fnref n="8" /> J. Yu,⁶⁷

S. P. Y. Yuen,<fnref n="23" /> I. Yusuff,³⁰,yy B. Zabinski,⁴² G. Zacharis,<fnref n="10" /> R. Zaidan,<fnref n="13" /> A. M. Zaitsev,¹³²,mm N. Zakharchuk,⁴⁵

J. Zalieckas,<fnref n="15" /> A. Zaman,¹⁵⁰ S. Zambito,⁵⁹ D. Zanzi,⁹¹ C. Zeitnitz,¹⁷⁸ G. Zemaityte,¹²² A. Zemla,⁴¹a J. C. Zeng,¹⁶⁹

Q. Zeng,¹⁴⁵ O. Zenin,¹³² T. Ženiš,¹⁴⁶a D. Zerwas,¹¹⁹ D. Zhang,⁹² F. Zhang,¹⁷⁶ G. Zhang,³⁶a,zz H. Zhang,³⁵b J. Zhang,<fnref n="6" />

L. Zhang,⁵¹ L. Zhang,³⁶a M. Zhang,¹⁶⁹ P. Zhang,³⁵b R. Zhang,<fnref n="23" /> R. Zhang,³⁶a,ww X. Zhang,³⁶b Y. Zhang,³⁵a Z. Zhang,¹¹⁹

X. Zhao,⁴³ Y. Zhao,³⁶b,aaa Z. Zhao,³⁶a A. Zhemchugov,⁶⁸ B. Zhou,⁹² C. Zhou,¹⁷⁶ L. Zhou,⁴³ M. Zhou,³⁵a M. Zhou,¹⁵⁰

N. Zhou,³⁵c C. G. Zhu,³⁶b H. Zhu,³⁵a J. Zhu,⁹² Y. Zhu,³⁶a X. Zhuang,³⁵a K. Zhukov,⁹⁸ A. Zibell,¹⁷⁷ D. Zieminska,⁶⁴

N. I. Zimine,⁶⁸ C. Zimmermann,⁸⁶ S. Zimmermann,⁵¹ Z. Zinonos,¹⁰³ M. Zinser,⁸⁶ M. Ziolkowski,¹⁴³ L. Živković,<fnref n="14" />

G. Zobernig,¹⁷⁶ A. Zoccoli,²²a,²²b R. Zou,³³ M. zur Nedden,<fnref n="17" /> and L. Zwalinski³²

(ATLAS Collaboration)

<footnote n="1">¹Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²Physics Department, SUNY Albany, Albany New York, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³Department of Physics, University of Alberta, Edmonton Alberta, Canada</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ªDepartment of Physics, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ᵇIstanbul Aydin University, Istanbul, Turkey</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ᶜDivision of Physics, TOBB University of Economics and Technology, Ankara, Turkey</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵LAPP, CNRS/IN2P3 and Université Savoie Mont Blanc, Annecy-le-Vieux, France</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne Illinois, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷Department of Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹Physics Department, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece</footnote>

<footnote n="10">¹⁰Physics Department, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou, Greece</footnote>

<footnote n="11">¹¹Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹²Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku, Azerbaijan</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³Institut de Física d'Altes Energies (IFAE), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology,
Barcelona, Spain</footnote>

<footnote n="14">¹⁴Institute of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia</footnote>

<footnote n="15">¹⁵Department for Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California,
Berkeley California, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="17">¹⁷Department of Physics, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany</footnote>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics and Laboratory for High Energy Physics,
University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland</footnote>

<footnote n="19">¹⁹School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom</footnote>

<footnote n="20">²⁰ªDepartment of Physics, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey</footnote>

<footnote n="20">²⁰ᵇDepartment of Physics Engineering, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep, Turkey</footnote>

<footnote n="20">²⁰ᶜIstanbul Bilgi University, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey</footnote>

<footnote n="20">²⁰ᵈBahcesehir University, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey</footnote>

<footnote n="21">²¹Centro de Investigaciones, Universidad Antonio Narino, Bogota, Colombia</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²²ªINFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²²ᵇDipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy</footnote>

<footnote n="23">²³Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany</footnote>

<footnote n="24">²⁴Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="25">²⁵Department of Physics, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="26">²⁶ªUniversidade Federal do Rio De Janeiro COPPE/EE/IF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</footnote>

<footnote n="26">²⁶ᵇElectrical Circuits Department, Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF), Juiz de Fora, Brazil</footnote>

<footnote n="26">²⁶ᶜFederal University of Sao Joao del Rei (UFSJ), Sao Joao del Rei, Brazil</footnote>

<footnote n="26">²⁶ᵈInstituto de Fisica, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil</footnote>

<footnote n="27">²⁷Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton New York, USA</footnote>

<footnote n="28">²⁸ªTransilvania University of Brasov, Brasov, Romania</footnote>

<footnote n="28">²⁸ᵇHoria Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania</footnote>

<footnote n="28">²⁸ᶜDepartment of Physics, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Iasi, Romania</footnote>
²⁸dNational Institute for Research and Development of Isotopic and Molecular Technologies,
Physics Department, Cluj Napoca, Romania

²⁸eUniversity Politehnica Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

²⁸fWest University in Timisoara, Timisoara, Romania

²⁹Departamento de Física, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina

³⁰Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

³¹Department of Physics, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

³²CERN, Geneva, Switzerland

³³Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago Illinois, USA

³⁴aDepartamento de Física, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile

³⁴bDepartamento de Física, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Valparaíso, Chile

³⁵aInstitute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

³⁵bDepartment of Physics, Nanjing University, Jiangsu, China

³⁵cPhysics Department, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

³⁶aDepartment of Modern Physics and State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics,
University of Science and Technology of China, Anhui, China

³⁶bSchool of Physics, Shandong University, Shandong, China

³⁶cDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, Key Laboratory for Particle Physics, Astrophysics and Cosmology, Ministry of Education; Shanghai Key Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai(also at PKU-CHEP), China

³⁷Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France

³⁸Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington New York, USA

³⁹Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark

⁴⁰aINFN Gruppo Collegato di Cosenza, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Italy

⁴⁰bDipartimento di Fisica, Università della Calabria, Rende, Italy

⁴¹aAGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science,
Krakow, Poland

⁴¹bMarian Smoluchowski Institute of Physics, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland

⁴²Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland

⁴³Physics Department, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas, USA

⁴⁴Physics Department, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson Texas, USA

⁴⁵DESY, Hamburg and Zeuthen, Germany

⁴⁶Lehrstuhl für Experimentelle Physik IV, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany

⁴⁷Institut für Kern- und Teilchenphysik, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany

⁴⁸Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham North Carolina, USA

⁴⁹SUPA - School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

⁵⁰INFN e Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy

⁵¹Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg, Germany

⁵²Departement de Physique Nucleaire et Corpusculaire, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland

⁵³aINFN Sezione di Genova, Italy

⁵³bDipartimento di Fisica, Università di Genova, Genova, Italy

⁵⁴aE. Andronikashvili Institute of Physics, Iv. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia

⁵⁴bHigh Energy Physics Institute, Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia

⁵⁵II Physikalisches Institut, Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen, Giessen, Germany

⁵⁶SUPA - School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom

⁵⁷II Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany

⁵⁸Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Grenoble-Alpes,
CNRS/IN2P3, Grenoble, France

⁵⁹Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Harvard University, Cambridge Massachusetts, USA

⁶⁰aKirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

⁶⁰bPhysikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

⁶¹Faculty of Applied Information Science, Hiroshima Institute of Technology, Hiroshima, Japan

⁶²aDepartment of Physics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong, China

⁶²bDepartment of Physics, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

⁶²cDepartment of Physics and Institute for Advanced Study, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

⁶³Department of Physics, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan

⁶⁴Department of Physics, Indiana University, Bloomington Indiana, USA

⁶⁵Institut für Astro- und Teilchenphysik, Leopold-Franzens-Universität, Innsbruck, Austria

⁶⁶University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
<sup>67</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames Iowa, USA

<sup>68</sup>Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia

<sup>69</sup>KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba, Japan

<sup>70</sup>Graduate School of Science, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan

<sup>71</sup>Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

<sup>72</sup>Kyoto University of Education, Kyoto, Japan

<sup>73</sup>Research Center for Advanced Particle Physics and Department of Physics, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan

<sup>74</sup>Instituto de Física La Plata, Universidad Nacional de La Plata and CONICET, La Plata, Argentina

<sup>75</sup>Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom

<sup>76a</sup>INFN Sezione di Lecce, Lecce, Italy

<sup>76b</sup>Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università del Salento, Lecce, Italy

<sup>77</sup>Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom

<sup>78</sup>Department of Experimental Particle Physics, Jožef Stefan Institute and Department of Physics, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

<sup>79</sup>School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom

<sup>80</sup>Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom

<sup>81</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom

<sup>82</sup>Louisiana Tech University, Ruston Louisiana, USA

<sup>83</sup>Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot and CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France

<sup>84</sup>Fysiska institutionen, Lunds universitet, Lund, Sweden

<sup>85</sup>Departamento de Física Teórica C-15, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

<sup>86</sup>Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany

<sup>87</sup>School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

<sup>88</sup>CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France

<sup>89</sup>Department of Physics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst Massachusetts, USA

<sup>90</sup>Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal Quebec, Canada

<sup>91</sup>School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

<sup>92</sup>Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Michigan, USA

<sup>93</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing Michigan, USA

<sup>94a</sup>INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy

<sup>94b</sup>Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Milano, Milano, Italy

<sup>95</sup>B.I. Stepanov Institute of Physics, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Minsk, Republic of Belarus

<sup>96</sup>Research Institute for Nuclear Problems of Byelorussian State University, Minsk, Republic of Belarus

<sup>97</sup>Group of Particle Physics, University of Montreal, Montreal Quebec, Canada

<sup>98</sup>P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

<sup>99</sup>Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics (ITEP), Moscow, Russia

<sup>100</sup>National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, Moscow, Russia

<sup>101</sup>D.V. Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

<sup>102</sup>Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany

<sup>103</sup>Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany

<sup>104</sup>Nagasaki Institute of Applied Science, Nagasaki, Japan

<sup>105</sup>Graduate School of Science and Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan

<sup>106a</sup>INFN Sezione di Napoli, Italy

<sup>106b</sup>Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Napoli, Napoli, Italy

<sup>107</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque New Mexico, USA

<sup>108</sup>Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud University Nijmegen/Nikhef, Nijmegen, Netherlands

<sup>109</sup>Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands

<sup>110</sup>Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb Illinois, USA

<sup>111</sup>Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, SB RAS, Novosibirsk, Russia

<sup>112</sup>Department of Physics, New York University, New York, New York, USA

<sup>113</sup>Ohio State University, Columbus Ohio, USA

<sup>114</sup>Faculty of Science, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan

<sup>115</sup>Homer L. Dodge Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Oklahoma, Norman Oklahoma, USA

<sup>116</sup>Department of Physics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater Oklahoma, USA

<sup>117</sup>Palacký University, RCPTM, Olomouc, Czech Republic
¹¹⁸Center for High Energy Physics, University of Oregon, Eugene Oregon, USA

¹¹⁹LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France

¹²⁰Graduate School of Science, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan

¹²¹Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

¹²²Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom

¹²³ªINFN Sezione di Pavia, Pavia, Italy

¹²³ᵇDipartimento di Fisica, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy

¹²⁴Department of Physics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Pennsylvania, USA

¹²⁵National Research Centre “Kurchatov Institute” B.P.Konstantinov Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia

¹²⁶ªINFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy

¹²⁶ᵇDipartimento di Fisica E. Fermi, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italy

¹²⁷Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh Pennsylvania, USA

¹²⁸ªLaboratório de Instrumentação e Física Experimental de Partículas - LIP, Lisboa, Portugal

¹²⁸ᵇFaculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

¹²⁸ᶜDepartment of Physics, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

¹²⁸ᵈCentro de Física Nuclear da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

¹²⁸ᵉDepartamento de Fisica, Universidade do Minho, Braga, Portugal

¹²⁸ᵇDepartamento de Fisica Teorica y del Cosmos and CAFPE, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Portugal

¹²⁸ᵇDepartment of CEFITEC of Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Caparica, Portugal

¹²⁹Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic

¹³⁰Czech Technical University in Prague, Praha, Czech Republic

¹³¹Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Prague, Czech Republic

¹³²State Research Center Institute for High Energy Physics (Protvino), NRC KI, Russia

¹³³Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom

¹³⁴ªINFN Sezione di Roma, Roma, Italy

¹³⁴ᵇDipartimento di Fisica, Sapienza Università di Roma, Roma, Italy

¹³⁵ªINFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy

¹³⁵ᵇDipartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy

¹³⁶ªINFN Sezione di Roma Tre, Roma, Italy

¹³⁶ᵇDipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università Roma Tre, Roma, Italy

¹³⁷ªFaculté des Sciences Ain Chock, Réseau Universitaire de Physique des Hautes Energies - Université Hassan II, Casablanca, Morocco

¹³⁷ᵇCentre National de l'Energie des Sciences Techniques Nucleaires, Rabat, Morocco

¹³⁷ᶜFaculté des Sciences Semlalia, Université Cadi Ayyad, LPHEA-Marrakech, Morocco

¹³⁷ᵈFaculté des Sciences, Université Mohamed Premier and LPTPM, Oujda, Morocco

¹³⁷ᵉFaculté des sciences, Université Mohammed V, Rabat, Morocco

¹³⁸DSM/IRFU (Institut de Recherches sur les Lois Fondamentales de l'Univers), CEA Saclay (Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives), Gif-sur-Yvette, France

¹³⁹Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California, USA

¹⁴⁰Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle Washington, USA

¹⁴¹Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom

¹⁴²Department of Physics, Shinshu University, Nagano, Japan

¹⁴³Department Physik, Universität Siegen, Siegen, Germany

¹⁴⁴Department of Physics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby British Columbia, Canada

¹⁴⁵SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford California, USA

¹⁴⁶ªFaculty of Mathematics, Physics & Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovak Republic

¹⁴⁶ᵇDepartment of Subnuclear Physics, Institute of Experimental Physics of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Kosice, Slovak Republic

¹⁴⁷ªDepartment of Physics, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa

¹⁴⁷ᵇDepartment of Physics, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

¹⁴⁷ᶜSchool of Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

¹⁴⁸ªDepartment of Physics, Stockholm University, Sweden

¹⁴⁸ᵇThe Oskar Klein Centre, Stockholm, Sweden

¹⁴⁹Physics Department, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
<sup>150</sup>Departments of Physics & Astronomy and Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook New York, USA

<sup>151</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom

<sup>152</sup>School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

<sup>153</sup>Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan

<sup>154</sup>Department of Physics, Technion: Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

<sup>155</sup>Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

<sup>156</sup>Department of Physics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

<sup>157</sup>International Center for Elementary Particle Physics and Department of Physics, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

<sup>158</sup>Graduate School of Science and Technology, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan

<sup>159</sup>Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan

<sup>160</sup>Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia

<sup>161</sup>Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto Ontario, Canada

<sup>162a</sup>INFN-TIFPA, Trento, Italy

<sup>162b</sup>University of Trento, Trento, Italy

<sup>163a</sup>TRIUMF, Vancouver British Columbia, Canada

<sup>163b</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Toronto Ontario, Canada

<sup>164</sup>Faculty of Pure and Applied Sciences, and Center for Integrated Research in Fundamental Science and Engineering, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan

<sup>165</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts University, Medford Massachusetts, USA

<sup>166</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine California, USA

<sup>167a</sup>INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Sezione di Trieste, Udine, Italy

<sup>167b</sup>ICTP, Trieste, Italy

<sup>167c</sup>Dipartimento di Chimica, Fisica e Ambiente, Università di Udine, Udine, Italy

<sup>168</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden

<sup>169</sup>Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana Illinois, USA

<sup>170</sup>Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular (IFIC), Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Spain

<sup>171</sup>Department of Physics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver British Columbia, Canada

<sup>172</sup>Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria British Columbia, Canada

<sup>173</sup>Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom

<sup>174</sup>Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan

<sup>175</sup>Department of Particle Physics, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel

<sup>176</sup>Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison Wisconsin, USA

<sup>177</sup>Fakultät für Physik und Astronomie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität, Würzburg, Germany

<sup>178</sup>Fakultät für Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften, Fachgruppe Physik, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany

<sup>179</sup>Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA

<sup>180</sup>Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia

<sup>181</sup>Centre de Calcul de l'Institut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des Particules (IN2P3), Villeurbanne, France

<sup>182</sup>Academia Sinica Grid Computing, Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan

<footnote><sup>a</sup>Deceased.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup>Also at Department of Physics, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>c</sup>Also at Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku, Azerbaijan.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>d</sup>Also at Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>e</sup>Also at TRIUMF, Vancouver British Columbia, Canada.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>f</sup>Also at Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>g</sup>Also at Physics Department, An-Najah National University, Nablus, Palestine.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>h</sup>Also at Department of Physics, California State University, Fresno, California, USA.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>i</sup>Also at Department of Physics, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>j</sup>Also at II Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>k</sup>Also at Departament de Fisica de la Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>l</sup>Also at Departamento de Fisica e Astronomia, Faculdade de Ciencias, Universidade do Porto, Portugal.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>m</sup>Also at Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>n</sup>Also at The Collaborative Innovation Center of Quantum Matter (CICQM), Beijing, China.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>o</sup>Also at Universita di Napoli Parthenope, Napoli, Italy.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>p</sup>Also at Institute of Particle Physics (IPP), Canada.</footnote>

<footnote><sup>q</sup>Also at Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania.</footnote>
rAlso at Department of Physics, St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, St. Petersburg, Russia.

sAlso at Borough of Manhattan Community College, City University of New York, New York City, USA.

tAlso at Department of Financial and Management Engineering, University of the Aegean, Chios, Greece.

uAlso at Centre for High Performance Computing, CSIR Campus, Rosebank, Cape Town, South Africa.

vAlso at Louisiana Tech University, Ruston Louisiana, USA.

wAlso at Institutucio Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avancats, ICREA, Barcelona, Spain.

xAlso at Graduate School of Science, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.

yAlso at Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg, Germany.

zAlso at Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud University Nijmegen/Nikhef, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

aaAlso at Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin Texas, USA.

bbAlso at Institute of Theoretical Physics, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia.

ccAlso at CERN, Geneva, Switzerland.

ddAlso at Georgian Technical University (GTU), Tbilisi, Georgia.

eeAlso at Ochadai Academic Production, Ochanomizu University, Tokyo, Japan.

ffAlso at Manhattan College, New York, New York, USA.

ggAlso at Departamento de Física, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

hhAlso at Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Michigan, USA.

iiAlso at The City College of New York, New York, New York, USA.

jjAlso at School of Physics, Shandong University, Shandong, China.

kkAlso at Departamento de Física Teórica y del Cosmos and CAFPE, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Portugal.

llAlso at Department of Physics, California State University, Sacramento, California, USA.

mmAlso at Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology State University, Dolgoprudny, Russia.

nnAlso at Departement de Physique Nucleaire et Corpusculaire, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland.

ooAlso at Institut de Física d'Altes Energies (IFAE), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.

ppAlso at School of Physics, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.

qqAlso at Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy (INRNE) of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria.

rrAlso at Faculty of Physics, M.V.Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.

ssAlso at National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, Moscow, Russia.

ttAlso at Department of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford California, USA.

uuAlso at Institute for Particle and Nuclear Physics, Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary.

vvAlso at Giresun University, Faculty of Engineering, Turkey.

wwAlso at CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France.

xxAlso at Department of Physics, Nanjing University, Jiangsu, China.

yyAlso at University of Malaya, Department of Physics, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

zzAlso at Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.

aaaAlso at LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France.