Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties

Transcription

1 Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties Marek Schönherr Universität Zürich SLAC 09 Nov 206 Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties /23

2 Introduction and disclaimer There are high precision calculations available for all production modes. Fully exclusive particle level calculations are available for every channel at least at NLO accuracy employing at least two diff. matching algorithms. Most channels have well tested multijet merged calculations available. Question: How do these calculations compare against dedicated calculations at higher accuracy? Perfect agreement is not expected, as different scale choices, resummation variables, non-perturbative corrections, etc. Can the differences be understood? For ggf such a study was conducted within LH 5. Ideal testbed because of the size of the effects and the availability of many different specialised calculations. Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 2/23

3 Performance of Monte-Carlo event generators Aim & focus study description of QCD activity in pp h + jets LH 5 arxiv: use state-of-the-art fixed-order and/or resummed calculations, modern precision parton shower matched & multijet merged calcs inclusive wrt. to Higgs kinematics and decay channels to accommodate as many calculations as possible purely perturbative calculation, no non-perturbative physics no MPI, hadronisation, intrisic k, etc. study (idealised) observables of theoretical interest/importance assess difference in description of these observables between MCs and fixed-order and/or resummed calculations provide RIVET analysis for common analysis with O(00) observables used by MCs and NLO calculations Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 3/23

4 Setup pp h + jets in gluon LHC 3 TeV HEFT in m t limit, m b = 0 m h = 25 GeV, Γ h = 4.07 MeV PDF: MMHT204nlo68clas8n (LHAPDF id: 25200) PDF: MMHT204nnlo68clas8 (LHAPDF id: 25300) modern PDF set, α S (m Z ) =, 5 flavour running scales: use scale that reduces to 2 m h in zero jet limit uncertainties: renormalisation and factorisation scale uncertainties: resummation scale, shower starting scale, etc. uncertainties: merging scale jets: anti-k with R = 0.4 and p > 30 GeV in η < Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 4/23

5 Contributions Fixed-order calculations SHERPA pp NNLO µ R = µ F = 2 m h uncertainties: 7-pt variation by factor two BFGLP pp NNLO µ R = µ F = 2 mh 2 + p,j 2 i uncertainties: 7-pt variation by factor two Höche, Li, Prestel Phys. Rev. D90 (204) 0540 Boughezal et.al. Phys. Lett. B748 (205) 5 Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 5/23

6 Contributions Fixed-order calculations GOSAM+SHERPA pp h +, 2, NLO µ R = µ F = 2 mh 2 + p,j 2 i uncertainties: 7-pt variation by factor two GOSAM+SHERPA pp h +, 2, MiNLO Greiner et.al. JHEP0(206)69 local emission scales, Sudakov form factors, µ core = 2 H T uncertainties: 7-pt variation by factor two LH 5 arxiv: GOSAM+SHERPA pp h + (, 2)j, pp h + (2, nnlo LoopSim with µ R = µ F = 2 mh 2 + p,j 2 i uncertainties: 7-pt variation by factor two LH 5 arxiv: Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 6/23

7 Contributions Analytic resummations HQT: p (h) in pp NNLL+NNLO Bozzi et.al. Nucl. Phys. B737 (2006) 73, de Florian et.al. JHEP(20)064 µ R = µ F = Q = 2 m h uncertainties: constrainted by 2 < µ R/µ F < 2 and 2 < µ R/Q < 2 RESBOS 2: p (h) in pp NNLL+NNLO, RESBOS 2: p (hj) in pp NLL+NLO Wang et.al. Phys. Rev. D86 (202) , Sun et.al.... µ R = µ F = Q = 2 m h, non-perturbative parameters uncertainties: factor 2 var. of µ R,F, Q STWZ: p veto in pp NNLL +NNLO Stewart et.al. Phys. Rev. D89 (204) µ H = i m h reproduces µ R = µ F = 2 m h, profile scales uncertainties: 3-pt µ H, profile scales, phase of µ H Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 7/23

8 Contributions Parton-shower matched & multijet merged POWHEG-BOX+PYTHIA8 pp h NNLOPS Hamilton et.al. JHEP0(203)222 2 m h for core, k for emissions (CKKW/MiNLO) uncertainties: 2-pt (7-pt in POWHEG, 3-pt in HNNLO) for µ R/F uncertainties: no resummation uncertainty evaluatable SHERPA pp h NNLOPS µ R = µ F = µ Q = 2 m h uncertainties: 7-pt for µ R/F, 3-pt for µ Q Multiperipheral limit resummation (BFKL) HEJ pp h + jets µ R = µ F = 2 H T uncertainties: 7-pt for µ R/F Höche, Li, Prestel Phys. Rev. D90 (204) 0540 Andersen, Smillie JHEP06(20)00 Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 8/23

9 Contributions Parton-shower matched & multijet merged MG5 amc+pythia8 pp h + 0,, 2j@NLO Frixione, Frederix JHEP2(202)06 MMHT204nlo68 with α S (m Z ) = 0.2 FxFx merging, µ R = µ F = m (h) on hj clustered config uncertainties: 7-pt for µ R, µ F, merging scale {25, 35, 50} HERWIG7+MADGRAPH5+OPENLOOPS pp h + 0,, 2j@NLO + 3, 4j@LO Bellm et.al. Eur. Phys. J. C76 (206) 96 UNLOPS merging, 2 m h for core config, t for reconstructed emissions uncertainties: 7-pt for µ R/F, merging and shower scale variations SHERPA+GOSAM pp h + 0,, 2, 3j@NLO, 4, 5j@LO Höche, Krauss, MS Phys. Rev. D90 (204) 0402 MEPS@NLO, 2 m h for core config, t for reconstructed emissions uncertainties: 7-pt for µ R/F, 3-pt for µ Q, Q cut = {5, 20, 30} Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 9/23

10 Inclusive Higgs boson rapidity dσ/dy [pb] Higgs boson rapidity ResBos 2 Sherpa h Nnlo LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to h Nnlo Ratio to h Nnlo Higgs boson rapidity y(h) Ratio to h Nnlo y(h) exellent agreement between NNLO and NNLOPS multijet merged with NLO normalisation, PDF effects Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 0/23

11 Inclusive Higgs boson rapidity dσ/dy [pb] Higgs boson rapidity ResBos 2 Sherpa h Nnlo LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to h Nnlo Ratio to h Nnlo Higgs boson rapidity y(h) Ratio to h Nnlo y(h) exellent agreement between NNLO and NNLOPS multijet merged with NLO normalisation, PDF effects Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 0/23

12 Inclusive Higgs boson rapidity dσ/dy [pb] Higgs boson rapidity ResBos 2 Sherpa h Nnlo MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to h Nnlo Ratio to h Nnlo Higgs boson rapidity y(h) Ratio to h Nnlo y(h) exellent agreement between NNLO and NNLOPS multijet merged with NLO normalisation, PDF effects Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 0/23

13 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) dσ/dp [pb/gev] 0 HqT ResBos 2 LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to HqT Ratio to HqT Ratio to HqT p (h) [GeV] p (h) [GeV] good agreement between HQT and NNLOPS, scale choice at high p multijet merged with NLO normalisation, very different at low p Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties /23

14 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) dσ/dp [pb/gev] 0 HqT ResBos 2 LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to HqT Ratio to HqT Ratio to HqT p (h) [GeV] p (h) [GeV] good agreement between HQT and NNLOPS, scale choice at high p multijet merged with NLO normalisation, very different at low p Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties /23

15 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j 0) dσ/dp [pb/gev] 0 HqT ResBos 2 MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to HqT Ratio to HqT Ratio to HqT p (h) [GeV] p (h) [GeV] good agreement between HQT and NNLOPS, scale choice at high p multijet merged with NLO normalisation, very different at low p Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties /23

16 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j = 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j = 0) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Sherpa h Nnlo LH5 pp h + jets comparison p (h) [GeV] fixed-order has various unphysical features good agreement between the NNLOPS multijet merged with NLO normalisation, HERWIG7 has much less soft radiation Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 2/23

17 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j = 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j = 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j = 0) dσ/dp [pb/gev] p (h) [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison p (h) [GeV] fixed-order has various unphysical features good agreement between the NNLOPS multijet merged with NLO normalisation, HERWIG7 has much less soft radiation Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 2/23

18 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j = 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j = 0) Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j = 0) dσ/dp [pb/gev] MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig p (h) [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison p (h) [GeV] fixed-order has various unphysical features good agreement between the NNLOPS multijet merged with NLO normalisation, HERWIG7 has much less soft radiation Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 2/23

19 Aside: Exclusive over inclusive rate dσ/dp [pb/gev] 0 Ratio of exclusive over inclusive Higgs production MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. inclusive LH5 pp h + jets comparison excl/incl excl/incl Ratio of exclusive over inclusive Higgs production exclusive p (h) [GeV] excl/incl p (h) [GeV] 20% of Higgs with p = 60 GeV are not accompanied by a jet Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 3/23

20 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] 0 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) LH5 pp h + jets comparison 0 2 BFGLP hj Nnlo p (h) [GeV] fixed-order has Sudakov shoulder at p h = 30 GeV due to jet cut here: bins left and right set to avarage Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 4/23

21 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) LH5 pp h + jets comparison Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) p (h) [GeV] p (h) [GeV] good agreement between NNLOPS, different scales at large p excess of POWHEG as p 0 (Higgs strahlung off dijet) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 4/23

22 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig p (h) [GeV] multijet merged different shape at p 60 GeV except MG5 amc (due to different scales?) LH5 pp h + jets comparison Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) p (h) [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 4/23

23 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) GoSam+Sherpa hj NLO MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig p (h) [GeV] multijet merged different shape at p 60 GeV same as at fixed-order NLO LH5 pp h + jets comparison Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) p (h) [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 4/23

24 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) BFGLP hj Nnlo GoSam+Sherpa hj NLO MiNLO nnlo MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig p (h) [GeV] NNLO impacts on shape at p 60 GeV LH5 pp h + jets comparison Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) NLL+NLO resummation gets close to NNLO result p (h) [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 4/23

25 Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) ResBos 2 BFGLP hj Nnlo GoSam+Sherpa hj NLO MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig p (h) [GeV] NNLO impacts on shape at p 60 GeV LH5 pp h + jets comparison Higgs boson transverse momentum (n j ) NLL+NLO resummation gets close to NNLO result p (h) [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 4/23

26 Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] 0 Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) LH5 pp h + jets comparison BFGLP hj Nnlo p (j) [GeV] NNLO and NLO show very good convergence for this scale choice multijet merged sim 20% lower in high-p (due to showering) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 5/23

27 Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) STWZ ResBos 2 BFGLP hj Nnlo p (j) [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to hj Nnlo Ratio to hj Nnlo Ratio to hj Nnlo Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) p (j) [GeV] NNLO and NLO show very good convergence for this scale choice multijet merged sim 20% lower in high-p (due to showering) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 5/23

28 Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) STWZ ResBos 2 BFGLP hj Nnlo GoSam+Sherpa hj NLO p (j) [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to hj Nnlo Ratio to hj Nnlo Ratio to hj Nnlo Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) p (j) [GeV] NNLO and NLO show very good convergence for this scale choice multijet merged sim 20% lower in high-p (due to showering) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 5/23

29 Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) STWZ ResBos 2 BFGLP hj Nnlo GoSam+Sherpa hj NLO p (j) [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to hj Nnlo Ratio to hj Nnlo Ratio to hj Nnlo Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) p (j) [GeV] NNLO and NLO show very good convergence for this scale choice multijet merged sim 20% lower in high-p (due to showering) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 5/23

30 Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) dσ/dp [pb/gev] Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) STWZ ResBos 2 BFGLP hj Nnlo GoSam+Sherpa hj NLO MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig p (j) [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to hj Nnlo Ratio to hj Nnlo Ratio to hj Nnlo Leading jet transverse momentum (n j ) p (j) [GeV] NNLO and NLO show very good convergence for this scale choice multijet merged sim 20% lower in high-p (due to showering) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 5/23

31 Jet vetoed cross sections inclusive σ0(p veto ) [pb] Jet veto cross section STWZ inclusive p veto [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to STWZ Ratio to STWZ Jet veto cross section p veto [GeV] very good agreement between NNLOPS and STWZ multijet merged with larger spread in shape, but within uncertainties once NLO normalisations accounted for PS resummation uncertainties nowhere fully assessed Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 6/23

32 Jet vetoed cross sections inclusive σ0(p veto ) [pb] Jet veto cross section STWZ inclusive p veto [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to STWZ Ratio to STWZ Jet veto cross section p veto [GeV] very good agreement between NNLOPS and STWZ multijet merged with larger spread in shape, but within uncertainties once NLO normalisations accounted for PS resummation uncertainties nowhere fully assessed Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 6/23

33 Jet vetoed cross sections inclusive σ0(p veto ) [pb] Jet veto cross section STWZ MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. inclusive p veto [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Ratio to STWZ Ratio to STWZ Jet veto cross section p veto [GeV] very good agreement between NNLOPS and STWZ multijet merged with larger spread in shape, but within uncertainties once NLO normalisations accounted for PS resummation uncertainties nowhere fully assessed Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 6/23

34 Jet vetoed cross sections p lead > 30 GeV σ(p j,min, pveto ) [pb] Jet veto cross section p j > 30 GeV p veto [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Jet veto cross section p veto [GeV] good agreement between NNLOPS multijet merged with larger spread in shape, but mostly within uncertainties PS resummation uncertainties nowhere fully assessed Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 7/23

35 Jet vetoed cross sections p lead > 30 GeV σ(p j,min, pveto ) [pb] Jet veto cross section MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. p j > 30 GeV p veto [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Jet veto cross section p veto [GeV] good agreement between NNLOPS multijet merged with larger spread in shape, but mostly within uncertainties PS resummation uncertainties nowhere fully assessed Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 7/23

36 Jet vetoed cross sections p lead > 200 GeV σ(p j,min, pveto ) [pb] Jet veto cross section p j > 200 GeV p veto [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Jet veto cross section p veto [GeV] larger differences between NNLOPS, also in normalisation multijet merged with larger spread in shape, but mostly within uncertainties PS resummation uncertainties nowhere fully assessed Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 8/23

37 Jet vetoed cross sections p lead > 200 GeV σ(p j,min, pveto ) [pb] Jet veto cross section MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. p j > 200 GeV p veto [GeV] LH5 pp h + jets comparison Jet veto cross section p veto [GeV] larger differences between NNLOPS, also in normalisation multijet merged with larger spread in shape, but mostly within uncertainties PS resummation uncertainties nowhere fully assessed Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 8/23

38 Mass corrections in Monte-Carlo event generators Greiner et.al. arxiv: LO H+ ( 0) LO H+ mt,b ( 0) NLO H+ ( 0) For the previous comparison all mass corrections were diabled to facilitate crosstool comparsion. However, mass corrections are extremely important as they quickly grow larger than the (substantial) higher order corrections. X / LO H+ dσ/dpt, H [pb/gev] LO H+2 LO H+3 ( 0) only H+ LO H+2 mt,b NLO H+2 LO H+3 mt,b ( 0) NLO H+3 ( 0) GoSam + Sherpa pp H +, 2, 3 jets at 3 TeV CT4nlo, R = 0.4 anti-kt, ηjet < 4.4, pt,jet = 30 GeV Ratio wrt. LO using mt approximation. Most event generators allow for finite mass corrections in some approximation. Generally, m t important at large p, m b at small p. X / LO H+3 X / LO H only H+2 Ratio wrt. LO using mt approximation. Ratio wrt. LO using mt approximation. only H Higgs boson transverse momentum: pt, H [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 9/23

39 Mass corrections in Monte-Carlo event generators POWHEG NNLOPS Hamilton, Nason, Zanderighi JHEP05(205)40 dσ/dpt,h [pb/gev] ratio to plain m t = mt m t, m b p T,H [GeV] m t, m b corrections up to NLO with different options for resummation of m b corrections MG5 amc FxFx Frederix et.al. JHEP08(206)006 σ per bin [pb] Higgs transverse momentum FxFx MT /FxFx EFT FxFx M /FxFx EFT inc MT /inc EFT inc M /inc EFT scale µ Q = 50 GeV µ Q = 20 GeV FxFx M FxFx EFT inc M inc EFT p T (H) [GeV] m t corrections in all multiplicities at NLO m b corrections only in lowest multiplicity Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 20/23 MadGraph5_aMC@NLO

40 Mass corrections in Monte-Carlo event generators SHERPA NNLOPS Höche et.al. Phys. Rev. D90 (204) 0540 dσ/dp H [pb/gev] m t, m b corrections in Wilson coefficients to NLO HEFT SM, m b = 0 SM, Q b cut [/ 2m b, 2m b] Sherpa+OpenLoops y 2 t -contributions: MC@NLO yty b-contributions: CKKW pp H + X s = 3 TeV SHERPA MEPS@NLO Buschmann et.al. JHEP02(205)038 m t corrections in all multiplicities at NLO dσ/dp H [pb/gev] m b corrections in all multiplicities at LO Sherpa+OpenLoops MEPS@NLO pp H + X s = 3 TeV 0 jet SM jet SM 2 jet SM 3 jet SM 0 jet HEFT jet HEFT 2 jet HEFT 3 jet HEFT Ratio to HEFT Ratio to HEFT p H [GeV] p H [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 2/23

41 Conclusions Higgs production in gluon fusion generally good agreement between Monte-Carlo event generators, but the more differential, the greater the differences generally good agreement with dedicated fixed-order calculations or resummations, but the more differential, the greater the differences differences enlarged when moving away from tuned comparison to individual default settings differences most likely larger in boosted region Other production channels not investigated in particular all channels available in NLO matched calculations, most in NLO merging if necessary Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 22/23

42 Thank you for your attention! Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 23/23

43 Backup Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 24/23

44 Dijet invariant mass Invariant leading dijet mass Invariant leading dijet mass dσ/dm [pb/gev] Hej LH5 pp h + jets comparison m(jj2) [GeV] m(jj2) [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 25/23

45 Dijet invariant mass Invariant leading dijet mass Invariant leading dijet mass dσ/dm [pb/gev] MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. Hej LH5 pp h + jets comparison m(jj2) [GeV] m(jj2) [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 25/23

46 Dijet invariant mass Invariant leading dijet mass Invariant leading dijet mass dσ/dm [pb/gev] MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. Hej LH5 pp h + jets comparison GoSam+Sherpa hjj NLO m(jj2) [GeV] m(jj2) [GeV] Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 25/23

47 Dijet rapidity difference dσ/d y [pb] Rapidity separation of leading and subleading jet Hej LH5 pp h + jets comparison Rapidity separation of leading and subleading jet y(j, j2) y(j, j2) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 26/23

48 Dijet rapidity difference dσ/d y [pb] Rapidity separation of leading and subleading jet MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. Hej LH5 pp h + jets comparison Rapidity separation of leading and subleading jet y(j, j2) y(j, j2) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 26/23

49 Dijet rapidity difference dσ/d y [pb] Rapidity separation of leading and subleading jet MG5_aMC FxFx Sherpa MePs@Nlo Herwig 7. Hej GoSam+Sherpa hjj NLO LH5 pp h + jets comparison Rapidity separation of leading and subleading jet y(j, j2) y(j, j2) Marek Schönherr Monte-Carlo simulation and uncertainties 26/23