arxiv: v3 [hep-ph] 1 Jul 2014

Transcription

1 Prepared for submission to JHEP On the ratio of t tb b and t tjj cross sections at the CERN Lare Hadron Collider arxiv: v3 [hep-ph] 1 Jul 214 G. Bevilacqua a and M. Worek b a INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Via E. Fermi 4, I-44 Frascati, Italy b Institute for Theoretical Particle Physics and Cosmoloy, RWTH Aachen University, Otto-Blumenthal Str., D-5256 Aachen, Germany [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: Triered by onoin experimental analyses, we report on a study of the cross section ratio σ(pp t tb b)/σ(pp t tjj) at the next-to-leadin order in QCD, focusin on both present and future collider eneries: s = 7, 8, 13 TeV. In particular, we provide a comparison between our predictions and the currently available CMS data for the 8 TeV run. We further analyse the kinematics and scale uncertainties of the two processes for a sinle set of parton distribution functions, with the oal of assessin possible correlations that miht help to reduce the theoretical error of the ratio and thus enhance the predictive power of this observable. We arue that the different jet kinematics makes the t tb b and t tjj processes uncorrelated in several observables, and show that the scale uncertainty is not sinificantly reduced when takin the ratio of the cross sections. Keywords: NLO Computations, Standard Model, QCD Phenomenoloy, Hadronic Colliders, Heavy Quark Physics TTK-14-3

2 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Leadin Order Results with Parton Shower 3 3 Next-to-leadin Order Differential Cross Sections 6 4 Next-to-leadin Order Cross Section Ratio TeV TeV TeV 13 5 Comparison with CMS Results at s = 8 TeV 15 6 Conclusions 17 1 Introduction In order to establish whether the scalar resonance observed at the Lare Hadron Collider (LHC) around 125 GeV [1, 2] matches the properties of the Standard Model (SM) His boson, quantities such as the couplins to fermions have to be measured with hih precision. A special interest is due to the Yukawa couplins to top (Y t ) and bottom (Y b ) quarks. Massive as they are, these quarks are ideal candidates for probin the nature of the new particle and more enerally of the Electroweak Symmetry Breakin mechanism. For a SM His boson with the observed mass value, the dominant decay mode is H b b [3]. The presence of an overwhelmin QCD backround discouraes His searches inthedirectproductionchannelpp H b b. Attention isratherputonhis production in association with one or more additional objects [4 7] due to the fact that backrounds are easier to control in such an environment. Amon all the associated production mechanisms that have been explored by the ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, the pp t th t tb b channel plays an important role [8 1]. The production rate for this process is directly sensitive to (Yt 2 Yb 2)/Γ H, where Y t andy b arethetop-andthebottom-yukawacouplinrespectively andγ H isthehis boson width (see Fiure 1, diaram A). Since the total His boson width can be constrained via independent measurements, e.. by the ratio of off-shell and on-shell production and decay rates in the H ZZ 4l and/or the H W + W 2l2ν channel [11 14], the t th t tb b process adds to the information on Y b provided by pp VH(H b b), where V = Z/W ±. However, the t th(h b b) final state is very challenin to measure. Search strateies employed by both experiments are based on the full reconstruction of the t tb b final state 1

3 A) B) C) Y t Y b Fiure 1. Representative Feynman diaram for the associated production of the His boson and a t t pair followed by the decay of the His boson into a b b pair (diaram A). Also shown are representative Feynman diarams for the irreducible backround with the same final state (diaram B), as well as the reducible backround with two jets (diaram C). A sinle dashed line corresponds to the His boson, double lines correspond to top quarks, sinle lines to bottom quarks and wily ones to luons. from chared leptons, missin enery and jets [15 18]. Usin b-jet tain, events with four b-jets are isolated, and the decays of the two candidate top quarks are reconstructed. Afterwards, the two b-jets which have not been associated to top decays are assined to the candidate His boson s decay. It should be clear that the identification of such decay products is not free of ambiuities. The so-called combinatorial backround is responsible for a substantial smearin of the His boson peak in the b b invariant mass. Toether with the possibility of misidentifyin liht jets with b-jets, this represents a serious obstacle to the observation of the His sinal and demands a ood control of dominant backrounds as a prerequisite for a successful analysis. Several strateies have been presented in the literature to increase a sensitivity for this challenin channel. The most promisin bein the jet substructure techniques for boosted heavy states and the matrix element methods [19 21] to name just a few examples. The process of t tb b production in QCD is the most important irreducible backround for the sinal under consideration (see Fiure 1, diaram B). With the help of b-jet tain alorithms, it is possible to isolate the contribution of this process from the most eneral reducible backround represented by t tjj production (see Fiure 1, diaram C). Instead of extractin absolute cross sections, one can measure the production rate of t tb b normalized to the inclusive t tjj sample. This procedure has been explored by both CMS and AT- LAS Collaborations [22 24] and has the advantae that many experimental systematics, includin luminosity uncertainty, lepton identification and jet reconstruction efficiency, are expected to cancel in the ratio. The overall systematic error should thus be dominated by the efficient and clean identification of bottom jets, referred to as the b-jet tain efficiency, as well as the tain efficiency for the liht flavor jets, referred to as the mista rate. On the theory side, the QCD backrounds pp(p p) t tb b and pp(p p) t tjj have been calculated at the next-to-leadin order (NLO) in QCD [25 3]. Fairly moderate, O(15% 3%) corrections have been found for both processes. The estimated theoretical uncertainties due to truncation of hiher-order terms in the perturbative expansion are of the same size. In addition, first results for t t production in association with either two liht or two bottom jets, and enhanced by a parton shower have recently appeared [31 33]. Scale 2

4 variations before and after matchin have been assessed to be rather similar. Each of these calculations, however, has been carried out with different sets of cuts, jet alorithms, values of top quark mass and parton distribution functions (PDFs). This makes a determination of the cross section ratio possible only at the price of introducin undesired additional theoretical uncertainties. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, we would like to provide a systematic analysis of t tb b and t tjj backrounds and extract the most accurate NLO predictions for the cross section ratio, to be used in comparisons with the available LHC data. The second oal is to examine whether the ratio has enhanced predictive power for His searches, by investiatin possible correlations between the two processes in the quest of reducin theoretical errors. The paper is structured as follows. In Section 2 we assess the kinematical rane of our predictions, i.e. we motivate which phase space restrictions, particularly in the transverse momentum of jets, shall be applied for our fixed-order results to be reliable. Beyond these limits, the stability of the perturbative expansion is likely to be endanered, and resummation of hiher order effects is required. We estimate these limits by studyin leadin-order t tjj production matched with Pythia parton shower, and use the obtained results to determine the kinematical setup for our predictions. In Section 3 we examine next-to-leadin order differential cross sections for both t tb b and t tjj processes, analysin similarities and possible correlations between the two backrounds. Subsequently, we provide in Section 4 the results for the ratio and absolute cross sections for three different collider eneries: s = 7, 8 and 13 TeV. Section 5 is devoted to a comparison with the currently available CMS data at s = 8 TeV. Finally, in Section 6 we draw our conclusions. 2 Leadin Order Results with Parton Shower We bein our analysis by explorin the validity domain of our perturbative calculation. To this end, we have enerated an inclusive parton-level sample of pp t tjj where j stands for u,d,c,s,b or. The event sample has been produced with Helac-Pheas [34 36] in the Les Houches event file format [37] and interfaced with the eneral purpose Monte Carlo proram Pythia 6.4 (version 6.427) [38] to include initial- and final-state shower effects. We simulate pp collisions at s = 8 TeV usin the followin parton level cuts, p Tj = p 2 x j +p 2 y j > 1 GeV, ( ) y j = 1 2 ln Ej +p zj < 4.5, (2.1) E j p zj R jj = φ 2 jj + y2 jj >.4, where p Tj, y j and R jj denote transverse momentum, rapidity and distance between the two jets in the (y,φ) plane respectively. The top quark mass is set to the value m t = GeV [39] and top quarks are assumed to be stable. All the other QCD partons, includin bottom quarks, are treated as massless. We work within the 5-flavor scheme, takin a LO 3

5 dσ/dp Tj [pb/gev] p T -ordered PS Q 2 -ordered PS LO 1 st dσ/dp Tj [pb/gev] p T -ordered PS Q 2 -ordered PS LO 2 nd p Tj [GeV] p Tj [GeV] dσ/dm jj [pb/gev] p T -ordered PS Q 2 -ordered PS LO dσ/dp Ttt - j [pb/gev] p T -ordered PS Q 2 -ordered PS LO M jj [GeV] p Ttt - [GeV] j Fiure 2. Comparison between the LO results obtained with Helac-Pheas and the LO+LL results produced by matchin LO predictions to Pythia for pp t tjj at the LHC with s = 8 TeV. The dash-dotted (blue) curve corresponds to the LO whereas the solid (red) to the LO+LL based on transverse-momentum-ordered parton shower and the dashed (black) curves to the LO+LL with virtuality-ordered shower. The followin distributions are shown: transverse momentum of the first and the second hardest jet (upper panel), invariant mass of the two hardest jets and transverse momentum of the t tj system (lower panel). PDF set with a 1-loop runnin stron couplin constant and five active flavors, N F = 5. More specifically, the Les Houches Accord PDF implementation [4 42] of the CT9MC1 PDF set [43] is used with the correspondin value of α s evaluated for µ = m t. Jets are reconstructed out of the partonic final state emerin after shower, usin the anti-k T jet clusterin alorithm [44] provided by the FastJet packae [45, 46]. The jet cone size is set to R =.5, and reconstructed jets are required to satisfy p Tj > 2 GeV, y j < 2.5, R jj >.5. (2.2) To allow for a more direct comparison with our fixed-order results, we decide to stop the evolution at the end of the perturbative phase. In other words, we nelect effects related to hadronization, underlyin events or multiple pp interactions. Also, decays of the top quark and QED radiation from quarks are switched off. All the other Pythia parameters have been left unchaned and correspond to default settins. 4

6 We have considered two different variants of shower, both provided within Pythia 6.4: transverse-momentum ordered shower (dubbed Pythia pt ) and virtuality-ordered or mass-ordered shower (dubbed Pythia Q 2). The startin scale for the shower has been set to p min T j and m min jj = p min T j 2(1 cosr) respectively. As a consistency check, we have compared the total rate obtained after showerin with the LO expectation based on our selection cuts. We obtain the followin cross sections: σ Helac+Pythia p T pp t tjj = 69.6 pb, σ Helac+Pythia Q 2 pp t tjj = 63.7 pb, σ Helac-Pheas pp t tjj = 77.1 pb. (2.3) The two showered results, based on different shower orderin variables, aree within 9% and are comparable with the LO cross section. In a subsequent step, we compare leadin-order predictions at the differential level before and after showerin. Fiure 2 shows distributions of the transverse momentum of the two hardest jets, the dijet invariant mass and the transverse momentum of the t tj 1 system, where j 1 denotes the first hardest jet. We observe that p T and invariant mass distributions are not stronly modified by the parton shower. Shape differences are within the correspondin theoretical errors, that we did not report on the plots for better readability. On the other hand, the transverse momentum distribution of the t tj 1 system shows a sizeable discrepancy in the low-p T reion. Note that at leadin-order, momentum conservation sets the equality p T (t tj 1 ) = p T (j 2 ), where j 2 is the second hardest jet, and thus the distributions of these two observables coincide. When the parton shower is turned on, the extra radiation allows the presence of additional jets, and the direct relation between the previous two quantities is lost. A lare Sudakov suppression is visible startin approximately below p t tj 1 = 4 GeV, while the fixed-order result displays a sharp peak 1. This discrepancy indicates that dominant hiher-order effects endaner the stability of the perturbative expansion in the small p T reion for this observable. Therefore to be on the safe side for all observables the followin choice of basic selection cuts is taken for a reliable fixed-order analysis: p Tj > 4 GeV, y j < 2.5, R jj >.5. (2.4) The specific value of the cut on the maximum jet rapidity is dictated by the detector acceptance and the experimental requirements for the bottom flavor jet reconstruction [49]. We report for completeness the total LO cross sections that we obtain usin the cuts 1 Similar conclusions have been obtained before for example in case of t tj either by means of matchin different LO multijet matrix elements with showerin prorams [47] or by matchin the NLO t tj matrix element with parton shower via the Powhe method [48]. 5

7 (2.4): σ Helac+Pythia p T pp t tjj = 26.4 pb, σ Helac+Pythia Q 2 pp t tjj = 23.1 pb, σ Helac-Pheas pp t tjj = 28.1 pb. (2.5) Let us conclude this section by sayin that the main point here was to justify our choice of the p T cut on the jets. We were not aimin at a very precise description of particular observables, such as the p T of the t tj system, over the complete rane of transverse momenta. For this reason, we made some approximations, which are, in our opinion, justified by our oal. These approximations consist of: lack of merin of samples with different multiplicity, lack a elimination of double countin. We stress that a more involved procedure without these approximations would not chane our conclusion, which is that a lowest p T of 4 GeV is very safe from the point of view of the reliability of the fixed order prediction. To be very precise, what mattered to us, was the point where a showered distribution diveres from the fixed order one. Merin, on the other hand, would mostly improve the low p T rane. Let us also stress here, that we have drawn similar conclusions from matchin the leadin order pp t tb b event sample with p T -ordered and Q 2 -ordered showers from Pythia. In that case, however, initial state confiurations with a b-quark have been nelected in the leadin order pp t tb b event sample. Such contributions are usually nelected in calculations for final states involvin a b b pair. The reason is simple: they contribute at the level of a percent, as has been checked in many studies in the past. In view of the quality of the prediction such contributions are irrelevant, but make the technical side of the work more involved. Of course, a shower will not chane anythin here. 3 Next-to-leadin Order Differential Cross Sections Havin established a safe kinematical domain, we now turn to examine the behavior of differential cross sections for both processes, pp t tb b and pp t tjj, where j stands for u, d, c, s, b, toether with correspondin anti-quarks. Also here initial state confiurations with a b-quark are nelected in calculations for the pp t tb b final state. As already mentioned, we are interested in investiatin similarities and correlations between the two backrounds with the oal of reducin theoretical uncertainties in the cross section ratio. Our NLO results are based on NLO CTEQ PDF set, i.e. CT1 [5], includin 2 loop runnin of α s and N F = 5, with µ R = µ F = µ for the renormalization and factorization 6

8 A) b t b b t t B) b t t t t C) q t t q t q t t q Fiure 3. Feynman diarams contributin to the dominant t tb b, t t, q t tq and q t t q subprocesses for the followin processes pp t tb b and pp t tjj respectively. Blobs denote all possible substructures of the correspondin diaram. scales, where 2 µ 2 (pp t tb b) = m 2 t p T (b i ), (3.1) i=1 µ 2 (pp t tjj) = m 2 t. (3.2) Jets are reconstructed usin the anti-k T clusterin alorithm with resolution parameter R =.5. We require the presence of at least two jets and impose the selection cuts of Eq.(2.4). No restriction on the kinematics of the possible third jet is applied. All the next-to-leadin order results presented in this paper have been obtained with the help of the packae Helac-NLO [51], which consists of Helac-1loop [52 54] and Helac-Dipoles [55, 56]. The interation over the phase space has been achieved usin Kaleu [57]. 2 This scale choice for the pp t tb b process has been first introduced in Ref. [27]. 7

9 1/σ dσ/dm jj [1/GeV] tt - bb - tt - jj 1/σ dσ/d R jj tt - bb - tt - jj M jj [GeV] R jj 1/σ dσ/dp Tj [1/GeV] tt - bb - tt - jj 1 st 1/σ dσ/dy j tt - bb - tt - jj 1 st p Tj [GeV] y j 1/σ dσ/dp Tj [1/GeV] tt - bb - tt - jj 2 nd 1/σ dσ/dy j tt - bb - tt - jj 2 nd p Tj [GeV] y j Fiure 4. Comparison of the normalized next-to-leadin order differential cross sections for pp t tb b and pp t tjj at the LHC with s = 8 TeV. The dash-dotted (blue) curve corresponds to the pp t tjj process whereas the solid (red) curve to pp t tb b. The followin distributions are shown: invariant mass of the two hardest jets, separation between those jets (upper panel), transverse momentum and rapidity of the first (middle panel) and the second hardest jet (lower panel). To understand similarities and differences between the two backrounds, it is helpful to identify the dominant partonic subprocesses. In the case of pp t tb b, at LO in the perturbative expansion, the most important production mechanism is via scatterin of two luons (see Fiure 3 - A). Within our selection cut choice, the channel contributes to the total LO cross section by about 9% at s = 8 TeV. On the other hand, pp t tjj is 8

10 1/σ dσ/dm jj [1/GeV] NLO - - ttbb NLO - ttjj LO - - ttbb LO - ttjj 1/σ dσ/d R jj NLO - - ttbb NLO - ttjj LO - - ttbb LO - ttjj M jj [GeV] R jj 1/σ dσ/dy j NLO - - ttbb NLO - ttjj LO - - ttbb LO - ttjj 1 st 1/σ dσ/dy j NLO - - ttbb NLO - ttjj LO - - ttbb LO - ttjj 2 nd y j y j Fiure 5. Comparison of the normalized leadin order and next-to-leadin order differential cross sections for pp t tb b and pp t tjj at the LHC with s = 8 TeV. The followin distributions are shown: invariant mass of the two hardest jets, separation between those jets and rapidity of the first and the second hardest jet. overned by two equally important channels, namely the channel (49%) and the q/q channel (4%) (see Fiure 3 - B and C). We note that the contribution of the process t tq q, which is related to the t tb b final state amounts to 2.6% and is almost neliible compared to the dominant contributions. These facts suest that the two backrounds t tb b and t tjj miht show different features in the jet kinematics. This would have of course a neative impact on correlations. A collection of observables is reported in Fiure 4, where the NLO distributions have been normalized to the correspondin absolute cross sections, in order to evidentiate shape differences between the two processes. We focus here on quantities related to jet activity, such as rapidity and transverse momentum distributions of the first and the second hardest jet, invariant mass and separation between the two jets. Note that the requirement of two hard jets with a resolution parameter R =.5 and p min T j = 4 GeV implies a lower bound on their invariant mass, of the order of m min jj = 19.8 GeV. We observe lare shape differences in several observables, in line with our expectations. First of all, the b-jets show a preference for the central reion of the detector in comparison with liht jets. This difference is to be ascribed mainly to the contribution of the q/q 9

11 1/σ dσ/dm tt - [1/GeV] tt - bb - tt - jj 1/σ dσ/dp Tt [1/GeV] tt - bb - tt - jj M tt - [GeV] p Tt [GeV] Fiure 6. Comparison of the normalized next-to-leadin order differential cross sections for pp t tb b and pp t tjj at the LHC with s = 8 TeV. The dash-dotted (blue) curve corresponds to the pp t tjj process whereas the solid (red) curve to pp t tb b. The followin distributions are shown: invariant mass of the t t system and (averaed) transverse momentum of the top quark. channel, which favors the emission of jets at larer rapidities than the channel. Note that, contrary to the t tjj case, in t tb b production the q/q channel is absent at LO and becomes available only at NLO. In eneral, jets from the t tjj backround show a much harder spectrum compared to t tb b. Sizeable differences can also be seen in the invariant mass and R jj separation between the two jets. In fact, usin our cut selection, the t tb b backround is dominated by the t t( b b) production mechanism (see Fiure 3 - A.2), which naturally favors the production of b-jet pairs with small invariant mass. In the case of t tjj, there is an interplay between two different mechanisms. On the one hand, t t( ) (Fiure 3 - B.2) is relevant for small values of m jj and ives a sinature quite similar to the b b case. On the other hand, luon radiation off initial-state partons (see e. Fiure 3 - B.1) provides an equally important contribution due to collinear enhancements. Thus, liht jets with lare rapidities and lare R jj separation are also likely to be produced in the t tjj case, which explains the quite different R jj spectrum. All the kinematical features described above are rather insensitive to hiher-order corrections as shown in Fiure 5, where we compare normalized LO and NLO differential cross sections. Despite sizeable differences in the jet activity, it miht still be possible that t tb b and t tjj show some similarity connected to the underlyin basic process they have in common, i.e. top quark pair production. To this end, we report in Fiure 6 normalized distributions of a few observables related to the top quark kinematics, namely invariant mass of the t t system and averaed transverse momentum of top quarks. Indeed, distributions show a very ood areement in shape, indicatin some level of correlation. The pretty different jet kinematics that characterizes the two backrounds has a minimal influence on the underlyin heavy t t system. 1

12 4 Next-to-leadin Order Cross Section Ratio In this Section we present NLO predictions for the ratio σ t tb b /σ t tjj at the LHC for s = 7, 8 and 13 TeV. In addition to the basic selection cuts of Eq.(2.4), we also report results for R =.8 and R jj >.8 to check whether the impact of hiher-order corrections is stable aainst these two parameters. Indeed we want to be confident that our choice R min jj = R =.5 is well within the rane of stability of the perturbative expansion TeV We start with the LHC results at s = 7 TeV. In Table 1, absolute NLO cross sections are shown toether with their ratio for two different values of the jet resolution parameter R and jet separation cut R jj. We observe that the cross section ratio is rather sensitive s = 7 TeV σ NLO [fb] σnlo pp t tb b pp t tjj [pb] Ratio R jj >.8, R = ± ±.2.87 R jj >.5, R = ± ±.2.15 Table 1. NLO cross sections for pp t tb b and pp t tjj at the LHC with s = 7 TeV, includin errors from the Monte Carlo interation. The ratio pp t tb b /σnlo pp t tjj is also shown. Results for two different values of jet resolution parameter R and jets separation cut R jj are reported. to the variation of those parameters. Decreasin R jj and R from.8 to.5 results in +21% chane that is mostly due to a lare, +19% shift in the NLO t tb b cross section. The NLO t tjj cross section on the other hand is affected only by 1%. Since at the NLO jets may have some structure, i.e. two partons can be inside a jet, an interplay between two different effects can be observed. On the one hand, the simultaneous decrease of the R jj separation cut results in hiher total NLO cross sections. On the other hand, a smaller resolution parameter R means that the probability of parton radiation outside the area with distance R is hiher. This may be translated into a larer number of soft jets with p Tj < p min T j and lower total NLO cross section. Since for the t tjj final state many events are concentrated around R jj = π, the NLO cross section is mildly affected by a chane in R jj cut from.8 to.5. Accordinly, the effect associated with the resolution parameter R dominates leadin to the lower NLO cross section. With R jj >.5 and R =.5, i.e. for the values that have been used in the experimental studies [23], our predictions for the absolute cross sections read t tb b (LHC 7TeV,m t = GeV,CT1) = (17%) 34.6(24%) [fb], (4.1) 11

13 and t tjj (LHC 7TeV,m t = GeV,CT1) = (14%) 1.92(14%) [pb]. (4.2) The theoretical uncertainty associated with nelected hiher-order terms in the perturbative expansion, can be estimated by varyin the renormalization and factorization scales up and down by a factor 2 around the central scale of the process, i.e. µ. The scale dependence is indicated by the upper/lower value, which corresponds to.5µ /2µ. Our estimated scale uncertainties for the interated cross sections are of the order 14% 24% (14% 2% after symmetrisation). In addition, we find that the size of the NLO QCD corrections is moderately affected by lowerin both R jj and R, i.e. chanes of the order of 15% or less are visible. Since those chanes are within our theoretical errors, we conclude that Rjj min = R =.5 is still perturbatively valid and a fixed-order NLO calculation can be considered reliable. We now turn to estimatin the theoretical error for the cross section ratio. Given that there is no unique prescription for this in the literature, we decided to evaluate it usin three different approaches. The first one assumes that the two backround processes are not correlated, and consists in calculatin all possible cross section ratios: R = t tb b(µ 1 )/t tjj(µ 2 ), where µ 1,µ 2 (.5µ,µ,2µ ). All possible combinations are considered, namely (µ 1,µ 2 ) = {(2,2), (2,1), (2,.5), (.5,2), (.5,1), (.5,.5), (1,.5) and (1, 2)}. The theoretical error band is determined takin the minimum and maximum values of the resultin ratios. This approach, that we name uncorrelated, ives the followin result: t tjj (uncorrelated) = (36%).26(25%). (4.3) t tb b /σnlo After symmetrisation of the error estimate, we et a scale uncertainty of 3% for the cross section ratio. The second approach assumes that some deree of correlation exists, so the possible combinations to be evaluated are restricted to the subset (µ 1,µ 2 ) = {(2,2), and (.5,.5)}. If t tb b and t tjj are indeed correlated, a reduction of the scale uncertainty in the ratio should be expected. Usin this approach, named correlated, we et the followin result: t tb b /σnlo t tjj (correlated) = (32%).13(12%). (4.4) Only a minor reduction in the size of the scale uncertainty is observed. The theoretical error band for the ratio is now 22% and is of the same order as the error for the absolute cross sections. The third and last approach uses the relative errors of the absolute cross sections as input. We assume these quantities as uncorrelated and add the errors in quadrature, separately for the cases.5µ and 2µ. This approach, that we name relative error, ives the result t tb b /σnlo t tjj (relative error) = (21%).29(28%). (4.5) After symmetrisation of the error estimate, the final scale uncertainty is 24%. 12

14 s = 8 TeV σ NLO [fb] σnlo pp t tb b pp t tjj [pb] Ratio R jj >.8, R = ± ±.2.9 R jj >.5, R = ± ±.3.19 Table 2. NLO cross sections for pp t tb b and pp t tjj at the LHC with s = 8 TeV, includin errors from the Monte Carlo interation. The ratio pp t tb b /σnlo pp t tjj is also shown. Results for two different values of jet resolution parameter R and jets separation cut R jj are reported TeV We repeat the same procedure for the case s = 8 TeV. The NLO cross sections are reported in Table 2, toether with the cross section ratio for the two different jet separation cuts and jet resolution parameters. Our conclusions are similar to the case of s = 7 TeV and therefore will be briefly summarized here. The absolute cross sections and correspondin theoretical errors for R min jj = R =.5 are: t tb b (LHC 8TeV,m t = GeV,CT1) = (18%) 55.7(24%) t tjj (LHC 8TeV,m t = GeV,CT1) = (15%) 2.79(13%) [fb], (4.6) [pb]. (4.7) Accordinly, results for the cross section ratio are presented, and scale uncertainties evaluated accordin to the three methods described in the previous Subsection: t tb b /σnlo t tjj (uncorrelated) = (39%).26(24%), t tb b /σnlo t tjj (correlated) = (39%).14(13%), t tb b /σnlo t tjj (relative error) = (24%).3(27%). (4.8) After symmetrisation, the final theoretical errors amount to 32% for the uncorrelated case and 26% for the correlated one. Usin the relative error approach, we find 26%. Scale uncertainties for the absolute t tb b and t tjj cross sections are of the order of 15% 24% (14% 21% after symmetrisation) and therefore comparable with the uncertainty of the ratio TeV The case of s = 13 TeV shows a similar pattern. The NLO cross sections for t tb b and t tjj are reported in Table 3, aain for two different values of the jet resolution parameter 13

15 s = 13 TeV σ NLO [fb] σnlo pp t tb b pp t tjj [pb] Ratio R jj >.8, R = ± ±.1.12 R jj >.5, R = ± ± Table 3. NLO cross sections for pp t tb b and pp t tjj at the LHC with s = 13 TeV, includin errors from the Monte Carlo interation. The ratio pp t tb b /σnlo pp t tjj is also shown. Results for two different values of jet resolution parameter R and jets separation cut R jj are reported. R and jet separation cut R jj. For R min jj = R =.5 we find t tb b (LHC 13TeV,m t = GeV,CT1) = (2%) 249.7(23%) [fb], (4.9) σt tjj NLO (LHC 13TeV,m t = GeV,CT1) = (21%) 8.4(1%) [pb]. (4.1) Scale uncertainties of the interated cross sections are at the same level as for s = 7 and 8 TeV and amount to 21% 23% (16% 22% after symmetrisation). The cross section ratio and its estimated error amount to t tb b /σnlo t tjj (uncorrelated) = (53%).29(23%), t tb b /σnlo t tjj (correlated) = (53%).19(15%), t tb b /σnlo t tjj (relative error) = (29%).32(25%). (4.11) For the uncorrelated case the theoretical error is 38%, whereas the correlated approach ives 34% and the relative-error approach 27%. We observe here that the cross section ratio and its uncertainty increases with the center-of-mass enery and the difference between uncertainties evaluated in the correlated and uncorrelated approaches becomes smaller. The theoretical error on the ratio is in this case slihtly larer than the correspondin one on the absolute cross sections. We summarize our predictions in Fiure 7, where the cross section ratio is presented as a function of the collider center-of-mass enery. The plot shows three different error bands accordin to the three methods employed for the uncertainty estimation. The error bands are relatively independent on the method adopted. The uncorrelated approach bein the most conservative one. We decided to adopt the latter for our comparison with the LHC data at s = 8 TeV, that will be discussed in the next Section. 14

16 R = σ tt - bb -/σ tt - jj.3.2 HELAC-NLO m top = GeV p Tj > 4 GeV NLO uncorr. NLO corr. NLO rel. err s [TeV] Fiure 7. Theoretical prediction for the σ t tb b/σ t tjj ratio at the LHC as a function of the collider center-of-mass enery. Three uncertainty bands correspond to different methods of estimatin scale variations. 5 Comparison with CMS Results at s = 8 TeV We now compare our NLO predictions with the correspondin measurement of the ratio σ t tb b /σ t tjj by the CMS Collaboration [23, 58], based on a data sample correspondin to an interated luminosity of 19.6 fb 1 collected at s = 8 TeV in the di-lepton decay mode. We quote below the experimental result, which has been derived from the inclusive t tb b and t tjj cross sections already unfolded to the full phase space for the top quark. In addition, the t tjj sample contains contributions from liht-, charm- and bottom-jets. Both rates take also into account the branchin ratio of the di-lepton decay mode of 1.8% [39] and corrections to the parton level jets. The result has been obtained for jets that are required to carry p Tj > 2 GeV (p Tj > 4 GeV), to be located in the rapidity rane of y j < 2.5 and to be separated in the rapidity-azimuthal anle plane by R jj >.5: σ t tb b /σ t tjj(lhc 8TeV,p Tj > 2 GeV) =.21±.3 (stat.)±.5 (syst.), (5.1) σ t tb b /σ t tjj(lhc 8TeV,p Tj > 4 GeV) =.22±.5 (stat.)±.5 (syst.). (5.2) A total systematic uncertainty of 22.6% has been estimated by CMS, where the dominant contribution for p Tj > 4 GeV comes from the mista rate (12.6%) and the b-jet tain 15

17 R = σ tt - bb -/σ tt - jj.3.2 HELAC-NLO m top = GeV p Tj > 4 GeV NLO CMS 8TeV s [TeV] Fiure 8. Theoretical prediction for the σ t tb b/σ t tjj ratio at the LHC as a function of the collider center-of-mass enery, compared to the available measurement result from CMS with s = 8 TeV. The uncertainty band depicts scale variation. efficiency (11.2%) [23]. Several experimental systematic uncertainties are reduced by takin the cross section ratio, as expected. We can directly compare the measured ratio for p Tj > 4 GeV with the correspondin Helac-NLO prediction at s = 8 TeV: t tb b /σnlo t tjj (LHC 8TeV,m t = GeV,CT1) = (5.3) Let us remind that we have adopted here the most conservative uncorrelated approach for our theoretical error estimate. As Fiure 8 also shows, our prediction calculated for the central scale differs by a factor of 2 from the experimental number. However, with the present level of accuracy the two results aree within 1.4σ. To facilitate the comparison, systematic and statistical uncertainties reported by the CMS experiment have been taken as uncorrelated and thus added in quadrature. The total experimental error obtained in this way amounts at present to ±.71 (32%). Let us conclude this section by discussin the impact of the top quark decays on the t tb b/t tjj ratio. To this end, we compare ratios evaluated with undecayed and decayed top quarks at the LO. First we have evaluated the ratio for p Tj > 4 GeV, y j < 2.5 and R jj >.5 at the LHC with s = 8 TeV usin on-shell top quarks for both processes i.e. σ LO t tb b and σlo t tjj at O(α4 s ). In the next step leptonic decays of W aue bosons have 16

18 t b t t b b b t b b t t Fiure 9. Example of Feynman diarams contributin to the irreducible backround pp t tb b at O(α 4 s). b b b W + W ν e e + µ ν µ b q q γ/z W W + µ ν e e + b b b b ν µ Fiure 1. Example of Feynman diarams contributin to the irreducible backround pp e + ν e µ ν µ b bb b at O(α 4 s α4 ) with double-resonant (left panel) and non-resonant (riht panel) top quark contributions. been included. More specifically pp e + ν e µ ν µ b bb b and pp e + ν e µ ν µ b bjj processes have been calculated with the help of Helac-Pheas, where full off-shell and finite width top and W effects have been included by takin into account the double-resonant, sinleresonant and non-resonant contributions at order O(α 4 s α4 ). Example of Feynman diarams contributin to the LO pp t tb b and pp e + ν e µ ν µ b bb b processes arepresented in Fiure 9 and Fiure 1. The followin basic selection has been applied to(anti-)top decay products to ensure that the leptons are observed inside the detector and are well separated from each other: p Tl > 2 GeV, η l < 2.5, R ll >.4, R lj >.4, p miss T > 3 GeV, (5.4) where p miss T is the transverse momentum of the system of two neutrinos. The impact of the top quark decays on the σ /σ t tb b t tjj cross section ratio has been established to be less than 5%, well within the estimated dominant theoretical uncertainties. 6 Conclusions In this paper we have presented the first consistent NLO theoretical predictions for the cross section ratio σ ttbb /σ ttjj in order to help hih-quality comparisons with the data collected 17

19 at the LHC. We have considered the case of both present and future collider eneries, s = 7, 8 and 13 TeV, explorin different methods to provide as much realistic estimates as possible of the scale uncertainty for our predictions. We have found that our estimate is relatively independent on the method applied. The method which assumes t tb b and t tjj uncorrelated should be taken as the most conservative one. Moreover, we have shown that the scale uncertainty of the ratio, at the level of 2% 3%, is comparable with the error on the absolute cross sections σ(t tb b) and σ(t tjj). Given that this uncertainty is the dominant theoretical error for the processes at hand, we conclude that the ratio shows the same theoretical accuracy as the individual cross sections 3. Let us remind that top quark decays are not included in our study. This corresponds to the unrealistic situation of a perfect top quark reconstruction with all decay channels included. Besides, the two liht or b-jets are always assumed not to be misassociated with the top quark decay products. It is clearly desirable to include top quark decays and study how they affect the cross section ratio. However, we expect a moderate impact, provided the same method of reconstructin the t t system is used in both processes, because the top quarks show a rather similar kinematics dependence in t tb b and t tjj backrounds. This correlation miht be helpful to better distinuish whether the reconstructed b-jets come from the t t pair, or e.. from the QCD b b splittin. This assumption is further supported by the study we have performed at the LO where very moderate effects on the ratio comin from the top quark decays have been found. The results presented in this paper have been obtained at the partonic level, and parton shower effects should, in principle, be included. We expect the parton shower to play an important role in case of loose cuts on jet p T, i.e. for p Tj 4 GeV, where a question mark is put on the reliability of a enuine fixed-order calculation. First results for t t production in association with up to two jets mered with parton shower have recently started to appear [31], but the assumed kinematical restriction on the jet p T (4 GeV, 6 GeV or 8 GeV) seems still too hih to shed liht on such effects. We note that the estimated uncertainty on the absolute cross section for the production of the t tjj system presented there is comparable with our estimates. Similar conclusions apply as well to the case of t tb b production, recently matched to the parton shower [32]. Scale variations before and after matchin have been assessed to be rather similar, at the level of 2% 3% which is aain in areement with our estimates. Given all these reasons, we believe that parton shower effects will have a minimal impact on our results in the considered kinematical rane. Finally, we have presented a comparison between our NLO predictions and the currentlyavailablecmsdatafor s = 8TeV.Thepresentlevelofareementisnotstrikinbut still within the uncertainties. However, new measurements of the cross section ratio, based on the complete data samples collected by both the CMS and the ATLAS experiments, are underway. Those enlared data samples, includin other top quark decay channels, will provide more accurate measurements, which we are lookin forward to compare with our predictions. 3 We note, however, that ratios and double ratios of cross sections calculated at different center-of-mass eneries could lead to predictions with hiher precision [59]. 18

20 Acknowledments The authors would like to thank colleaues from the ATLAS and CMS experiments for motivatin them to perform this study. We acknowlede Tae Jeon Kim for useful discussions, and Adam Kardos for clarifications concernin parameter settins in Pythia. The work of M. Worek was supported in part by the DFG under Grant No. WO 19/1-1 ( Sinals and Backrounds Beyond Leadin Order. Phenomenoloical studies for the LHC ) and by the Research Fundin Proram Aristeta, Hiher Order Calculations and Tools for Hih Enery Colliders, HOCTools (co-financed by the European Union(European Social Fund ESF) and Greek national funds throuh the Operational Proram Education and Lifelon Learnin of the National Strateic Reference Framework (NSRF)). References [1] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model His boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 716 (212) 1 [arxiv: [hep-ex]]. [2] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 716 (212) 3 [arxiv: [hep-ex]]. [3] A. Djouadi, The Anatomy of electro-weak symmetry breakin. I: The His boson in the standard model, Phys. Rept. 457 (28) 1 [hep-ph/53172]. [4] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], Search for the Standard Model His boson produced in association with a vector boson and decayin to a b-quark pair with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B 718 (212) 369 [arxiv: [hep-ex]]. [5] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Search for the standard model His boson decayin to bottom quarks in pp collisions at s = 7 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 71 (212) 284 [arxiv: [hep-ex]]. [6] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Search for the standard model His boson produced in association with a top-quark pair in pp collisions at the LHC, JHEP 135 (213) 145 [arxiv: [hep-ex]]. [7] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Search for the standard model His boson produced in association with a W or a Z boson and decayin to bottom quarks, Phys. Rev. D 89 (214) 123 [arxiv: [hep-ex]]. [8] K. Desch and M. Schumacher, Model independent determination of the top Yukawa couplin from LHC and LC, Eur. Phys. J. C 46 (26) 527 [hep-ph/47159]. [9] R. Lafaye, T. Plehn, M. Rauch, D. Zerwas and M. Duhrssen, Measurin the His Sector, JHEP 98 (29) 9 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [1] M. Klute, R. Lafaye, T. Plehn, M. Rauch and D. Zerwas, Measurin His Couplins from LHC Data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (212) 1181 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [11] F. Caola and K. Melnikov, Constrainin the His boson width with ZZ production at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 88 (213) 5424 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. 19

21 [12] J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis and C. Williams, Boundin the His width at the LHC usin full analytic results for e e + µ µ +, JHEP 144 (214) 6 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [13] J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis and C. Williams, Boundin the His width at the LHC: complementary results from H WW, Phys. Rev. D 89 (214) 5311 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [14] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Constraints on the His boson width from off-shell production and decay to ZZ lll l and llνν, CMS-PAS-HIG [15] V. Drolliner, T. Muller and D. Deneri, Searchin for His bosons in association with top quark pairs in the H b anti-b decay mode, hep-ph/ [16] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], Search for the Standard Model His boson produced in association with top quarks in proton-proton collisions at s = 7 TeV usin the ATLAS detector, ATLAS-CONF [17] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Search for the Standard Model His boson in the tth channel, CMS-PAS-HIG [18] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Search for His Boson Production in Association with a Top-Quark Pair and Decayin to Bottom Quarks or Tau Leptons, CMS-PAS-HIG [19] T. Plehn, G. P. Salam and M. Spannowsky, Fat Jets for a Liht His, Phys. Rev. Lett. 14 (21) [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [2] P. Artoisenet, P. de Aquino, F. Maltoni and O. Mattelaer, Unravellin tth via the Matrix Element Method, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (213) 9182 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [21] J. Bramante, A. Delado and A. Martin, Cornerin a Hyper His: Anular Kinematics for Boosted His Bosons with Top Pairs, arxiv: [hep-ph]. [22] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], First Measurement of the Cross Section Ratio σ(ttbb)/σ(ttjj) in pp Collisions at s = 7 TeV, CMS-PAS-TOP [23] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Measurement of the Cross Section Ratio σ(ttbb)/σ(ttjj) in pp Collisions at s = 8 TeV, CMS-PAS-TOP [24] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], A study of heavy flavor quarks produced in association with top quark pairs at s = 7 TeV usin the ATLAS detector, arxiv: [hep-ex]. [25] A. Bredenstein, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and S. Pozzorini, NLO QCD corrections to pp t anti-t b anti-b + X at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (29) 122 [arxiv:95.11 [hep-ph]]. [26] G. Bevilacqua, M. Czakon, C. G. Papadopoulos, R. Pittau and M. Worek, Assault on the NLO Wishlist: pp t anti-t b anti-b, JHEP 99 (29) 19 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [27] A. Bredenstein, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and S. Pozzorini, NLO QCD Corrections to Top Anti-Top Bottom Anti-Bottom Production at the LHC: 2. full hadronic results, JHEP 13 (21) 21 [arxiv:11.46 [hep-ph]]. [28] M. Worek, On the next-to-leadin order QCD K-factor for top t tb b production at the TeVatron, JHEP 122 (212) 43 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [29] G. Bevilacqua, M. Czakon, C. G. Papadopoulos and M. Worek, Dominant QCD 2

22 Backrounds in His Boson Analyses at the LHC: A Study of pp t anti-t + 2 jets at Next-To-Leadin Order, Phys. Rev. Lett. 14 (21) 1622 [arxiv:12.49 [hep-ph]]. [3] G. Bevilacqua, M. Czakon, C. G. Papadopoulos and M. Worek, Hadronic top-quark pair production in association with two jets at Next-to-Leadin Order QCD, Phys. Rev. D 84 (211) [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [31] S. Hoeche, F. Krauss, P. Maierhoefer, S. Pozzorini, M. Schonherr and F. Sieert, Next-to-leadin order QCD predictions for top-quark pair production with up to two jets mered with a parton shower, arxiv: [hep-ph]. [32] F. Cascioli, P. Maierhoefer, N. Moretti, S. Pozzorini and F. Sieert, NLO matchin for ttbb production with massive b-quarks, arxiv: [hep-ph]. [33] A. Kardos and Z. Trocsanyi, Hadroproduction of t anti-t pair with a b anti-b pair with PowHel, arxiv: [hep-ph]. [34] A. Kanaki and C. G. Papadopoulos, HELAC: A Packae to compute electroweak helicity amplitudes, Comput. Phys. Commun. 132 (2) 36 [hep-ph/282]. [35] C. G. Papadopoulos, PHEGAS: A Phase space enerator for automatic cross-section computation, Comput. Phys. Commun. 137 (21) 247 [hep-ph/7335]. [36] A. Cafarella, C. G. Papadopoulos and M. Worek, Helac-Pheas: A Generator for all parton level processes, Comput. Phys. Commun. 18 (29) 1941 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [37] J. Alwall, A. Ballestrero, P. Bartalini, S. Belov, E. Boos, A. Buckley, J. M. Butterworth and L. Dudko et al., A Standard format for Les Houches event files, Comput. Phys. Commun. 176 (27) 3 [hep-ph/6917]. [38] T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna and P. Z. Skands, PYTHIA 6.4 Physics and Manual, JHEP 65 (26) 26 [hep-ph/63175]. [39] J. Beriner et al. [Particle Data Group Collaboration], Review of Particle Physics (RPP), Phys. Rev. D 86 (212) 11. [4] W. Giele, E. W. N. Glover, I. Hinchliffe, J. Huston, E. Laenen, E. Pilon, A. Vot and S. Alekhin et al., The QCD / SM workin roup: Summary report, hep-ph/ [41] M. R. Whalley, D. Bourilkov and R. C. Group, The Les Houches accord PDFs (LHAPDF) and LHAGLUE, hep-ph/5811. [42] DBourilkov, R CGroup and M RWhalley, LHAPDF: PDF use from the Tevatron to the LHC, hep-ph/6524. [43] H. -L. Lai, J. Huston, S. Mrenna, P. Nadolsky, D. Stump, W. -K. Tun and C. -P. Yuan, Parton Distributions for Event Generators, JHEP 14 (21) 35 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [44] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam and G. Soyez, The Anti-k(t) jet clusterin alorithm, JHEP 84 (28) 63 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [45] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam and G. Soyez, FastJet User Manual, Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (212) 1896 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [46] M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam, Dispellin the N 3 myth for the k t jet-finder, Phys. Lett. B 641 (26) 57 [hep-ph/51221]. [47] M. L. Manano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini and M. Treccani, Matchin matrix elements and 21

23 shower evolution for top-quark production in hadronic collisions, JHEP 71 (27) 13 [hep-ph/611129]. [48] S. Alioli, S. -O. Moch and P. Uwer, Hadronic top-quark pair-production with one jet and parton showerin, JHEP 121 (212) 137 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [49] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment, JINST 8 (213) P413 [arxiv: [hep-ex]]. [5] 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 (21) 7424 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [51] G. Bevilacqua, M. Czakon, M. V. Garzelli, A. van Hameren, A. Kardos, C. G. Papadopoulos, R. Pittau and M. Worek, HELAC-NLO, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184 (213) 986 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [52] A. van Hameren, C. G. Papadopoulos and R. Pittau, Automated one-loop calculations: A Proof of concept, JHEP 99 (29) 16 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [53] G. Ossola, C. G. Papadopoulos and R. Pittau, CutTools: A Proram implementin the OPP reduction method to compute one-loop amplitudes, JHEP 83 (28) 42 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [54] A. van Hameren, OneLOop: For the evaluation of one-loop scalar functions, Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 (211) 2427 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [55] M. Czakon, C. G. Papadopoulos and M. Worek, Polarizin the Dipoles, JHEP 98 (29) 85 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [56] G. Bevilacqua, M. Czakon, M. Kubocz and M. Worek, Complete Nay-Soper subtraction for next-to-leadin order calculations in QCD, JHEP 131 (213) 24 [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [57] A. van Hameren, Kaleu: A General-Purpose Parton-Level Phase Space Generator, arxiv: [hep-ph]. [58] S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], in preparation. [59] M. L. Manano and J. Rojo, Cross Section Ratios between different CM eneries at the LHC: opportunities for precision measurements and BSM sensitivity, JHEP 128, 1 (212) [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. 22