pdgLive

${{\mathit H}}$ SIGNAL STRENGTHS IN DIFFERENT CHANNELS

The ${{\mathit H}}$ signal strength in a particular final state ${{\mathit x}}{{\mathit x}}$ is given by the cross section times branching ratio in this channel normalized to the Standard Model (SM) value, $\sigma $ $\cdot{}$ B(${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit x}}{{\mathit x}}$) $/$ ($\sigma $ $\cdot{}$ B(${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit x}}{{\mathit x}}))_{{\mathrm {SM}}}$, for the specified mass value of ${{\mathit H}}$. For the SM predictions, see DITTMAIER 2011, DITTMAIER 2012, and HEINEMEYER 2013A. Results for fiducial and differential cross sections are also listed below.

${{\mathit \tau}^{+}}{{\mathit \tau}^{-}}$ Final State

INSPIRE JSON (beta) PDGID:

VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECN

COMMENT

$\bf{ 0.91 \pm0.09}$

OUR AVERAGE

$0.85$ $\pm0.10$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$1.09$ ${}^{+0.18}_{-0.17}$ ${}^{+0.26}_{-0.22}$ ${}^{+0.16}_{-0.11}$

ATLS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$1.11$ ${}^{+0.24}_{-0.22}$

LHC

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV

$1.68$ ${}^{+2.28}_{-1.68}$

TEVA

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 1.96 TeV

• • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • •

$1.28$ ${}^{+0.30}_{-0.29}$ ${}^{+0.25}_{-0.21}$

ATLS

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}/{{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$, ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$, 13 TeV

$1.64$ ${}^{+0.68}_{-0.54}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV, boosted ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$

$0.82$ ${}^{+0.11}_{-0.10}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$0.67$ ${}^{+0.20}_{-0.18}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$0.81$ ${}^{+0.17}_{-0.16}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$1.79$ ${}^{+0.47}_{-0.42}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

ATLS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$2.5$ ${}^{+1.4}_{-1.3}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit W}}/{{\mathit H}}{{\mathit Z}}$, ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$, 13 TeV

$1.24$ ${}^{+0.29}_{-0.27}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$1.02$ ${}^{+0.26}_{-0.24}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$1.09$ ${}^{+0.27}_{-0.26}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV

$0.98$ $\pm0.18$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8, 13 TeV

$2.3$ $\pm1.6$

ATLS

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit W}}/{{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit X}}$, 8 TeV

$1.41$ ${}^{+0.40}_{-0.36}$

ATLS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV

$0.88$ ${}^{+0.30}_{-0.28}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV

$1.44$ ${}^{+0.30}_{-0.29}$ ${}^{+0.29}_{-0.23}$

ATLS

${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV

$1.43$ ${}^{+0.27}_{-0.26}$ ${}^{+0.32}_{-0.25}$ $\pm0.09$

ATLS

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 7, 8 TeV

$0.78$ $\pm0.27$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 7, 8 TeV

$0.00$ ${}^{+8.44}_{-0.00}$

CDF

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 1.96 TeV

$3.96$ ${}^{+4.11}_{-3.38}$

D0

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 1.96 TeV

$0.4$ ${}^{+1.6}_{-2.0}$

ATLS

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 7 TeV

$0.09$ ${}^{+0.76}_{-0.74}$

CMS

${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 7, 8 TeV

¹	CMS 2022 report combined results (see their Extended Data Table 2) using up to 138 fb${}^{-1}$ of data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV, assuming ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.38 GeV. See their Fig. 2 right.

²

AABOUD 2019AQ use 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The first, second and third quoted errors are statistical, experimental systematic and theory systematic uncertainties, respectively. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV and corresponds to 4.4 standard deviations. Combining with 7 TeV and 8 TeV results (AAD 2015AH), the observed significance is 6.4 standard deviations. The cross sections in the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$ decay channel (${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV) are measured to $3.77$ ${}^{+0.60}_{-0.59}$ (stat) ${}^{+0.87}_{-0.74}$ (syst) pb for the inclusive, $0.28$ $\pm0.09$ ${}^{+0.11}_{-0.09}$ pb for VBF, and $3.1$ $\pm1.0$ ${}^{+1.6}_{-1.3}$ pb for gluon-fusion production. See their Table XI for the cross sections in the framework of simplified template cross sections.

³

AAD 2016AN perform fits to the ATLAS and CMS data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 and 8 TeV. The signal strengths for individual production processes are $1.0$ $\pm0.6$ for gluon fusion, $1.3$ $\pm0.4$ for vector boson fusion, $-1.4$ $\pm1.4$ for ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$ production, $2.2$ ${}^{+2.2}_{-1.8}$ for ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ production, and $-1.9$ ${}^{+3.7}_{-3.3}$ for ${{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}{{\mathit H}}$ production.

⁴	AAD 2016AN: In the fit, relative production cross sections are fixed to those in the Standard Model. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.09 GeV.

⁵

AALTONEN 2013M combine all Tevatron data from the CDF and D0 Collaborations with up to 10.0 fb${}^{-1}$ and 9.7 fb${}^{-1}$, respectively, of ${{\mathit p}}{{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 1.96 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV.

⁶

AAD 2024BE measure the ${{\mathit V}}{{\mathit H}}$ Higgs production (${{\mathit V}}$ = ${{\mathit W}}$ , ${{\mathit Z}}$) with ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV with 140 fb${}^{-1}$ data. The quoted signal strength corresponds to 4.2 standard deviations. The signal strengths for individual ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$ and ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ productions are $1.48$ ${}^{+0.56}_{-0.50}$ and $1.09$ ${}^{+0.51}_{-0.44}$, respectively. The results are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV. See their Fig. 4.

⁷

HAYRAPETYAN 2024AT present measurements of the boosted ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$ ($p_T$ $>$ 250 GeV) using 138 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collision data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV. The quoted signal strength corresponds to a significance of 3.5 standard deviations. The fiducial inclusive production cross section is measured to be $3.88$ ${}^{+1.69}_{-1.35}$ fb. The differential fiducial cross sections as a function of Higgs boson and leading jet $p_T$ are given in their Fig. 3.

⁸

TUMASYAN 2023Y measure Higgs production with ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV with 138 fb${}^{-1}$ data. The quoted results are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.38 GeV.

⁹	The inclusive $\sigma \cdot{}B$ is $2800$ ${}^{+356}_{-335}$ fb (see their Figs. 10 and 14). See their Fig. 15 for the 68 $\%$ and 95 $\%$ CL contours in the ${{\mathit \kappa}_{{{V}}}}−{{\mathit \kappa}_{{{F}}}}$ plane.

¹⁰

The quoted result is for the stage-0 simplified template cross section (STXS) and the ${{\mathit \sigma}_{{{ggF}}}}\cdot{}{{\mathit B}}$ is $2030$ ${}^{+598}_{-555}$ fb (see their Figs. 10 and 14). Measured cross sections and ratios to the SM predictions in the reduced stage-1.2 STXS (see their Fig. 1) are shown in their Table 9 and Figs. 12 and 14.

¹¹

The quoted result is for the stage-0 STXS and the ${{\mathit \sigma}}_{VBF}\cdot{}{{\mathit B}}$ is $267$ ${}^{+53.9}_{-52.6}$ fb (see their Figs. 10 and 14). Measured cross sections and ratios to the SM predictions in the reduced stage-1.2 STXS (see their Fig. 2) are shown in their Table 9 and Figs. 12, 14.

¹²

The quoted result is for the stage-0 STXS and the ${{\mathit \sigma}_{{{VH}}}}\cdot{}{{\mathit B}}$ is $79.0$ ${}^{+20.5}_{-18.6}$ fb (see their Figs. 10 and 14). Measured cross sections and ratios to the SM predictions in the reduced stage-1.2 STXS (see their Fig. 3) are shown in their Table 9 and Figs. 12, 14.

¹³

AAD 2022Q measure cross sections of ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV with 139 fb${}^{-1}$ data. The quoted results are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.09 GeV and $\vert $y(${{\mathit H}})\vert <$2.5 is required. The inclusive fiducial ${{\mathit \sigma}}\cdot{}{{\mathit B}}$ is $2.94$ $\pm0.21$ ${}^{+0.37}_{-0.32}$ pb. The fiducial ${{\mathit \sigma}}\cdot{}{{\mathit B}}$ for the four dominant production modes are $2.65$ $\pm0.41$ ${}^{+0.91}_{-0.67}$ pb for ggF, $0.197$ $\pm0.028$ ${}^{+0.032}_{-0.026}$ pb for VBF, $0.115$ $\pm0.058$ ${}^{+0.042}_{-0.040}$ pb for ${{\mathit V}}{{\mathit H}}$, $0.033$ $\pm0.031$ ${}^{+0.022}_{-0.017}$ pb for ${{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}{{\mathit H}}$. The cross sections using simplified template cross section framework (STXS) are given in their Fig. 14(a) and Table 15. The STXS bins (a reduced stage 1.2) are defined in their Fig. 1.

¹⁴

TUMASYAN 2022AJ measure cross sections with ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \tau}}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV with 138 fb${}^{-1}$ data. The fiducial inclusive $\sigma \cdot{}B$ is $426$ $\pm102$ fb while $408$ $\pm27$ fb is expected in the Standard Mode for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.38 GeV. Three differential cross sections are given; see their Fig. 1.

¹⁵	SIRUNYAN 2019AF use 35.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV and corresponds to 2.3 standard deviations.

¹⁶

SIRUNYAN 2019AF use 35.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit W}}/{{\mathit Z}}$ channels are added with a few updates on gluon fusion and vector boson fusion with respect to SIRUNYAN 2018Y. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV and corresponds to 5.5 standard deviations. The signal strengths for the individual production modes are: $1.12$ ${}^{+0.53}_{-0.50}$ for gluon fusion, $1.13$ ${}^{+0.45}_{-0.42}$ for vector boson fusion, $3.39$ ${}^{+1.68}_{-1.54}$ for ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$ and $1.23$ ${}^{+1.62}_{-1.35}$ for ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$. See their Fig. 7 for other couplings (${{\mathit \kappa}_{{{V,}}}}{{\mathit \kappa}_{{{f}}}}$).

¹⁷	SIRUNYAN 2019AT perform a combine fit to 35.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV. This combination is based on SIRUNYAN 2018Y.

¹⁸	SIRUNYAN 2018Y use 35.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.09 GeV and corresponds to 4.9 standard deviations.

¹⁹

SIRUNYAN 2018Y combine the result of 35.9 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV with the results obtained from data of 4.9 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 19.7 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV (KHACHATRYAN 2015AM). The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.09 GeV and corresponds to 5.9 standard deviations.

²⁰

AAD 2016AC measure the signal strength with ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit W}}/{{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit X}}$ processes using 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ of $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV.

²¹	AAD 2016K use up to 4.7 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and up to 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.36 GeV.

²²

AAD 2015AH use 4.5 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The third uncertainty in the measurement is theory systematics. The signal strength for the gluon fusion mode is $2.0$ $\pm0.8$ ${}^{+1.2}_{-0.8}$ $\pm0.3$ and that for vector boson fusion and ${{\mathit W}}$ $/$ ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ production modes is $1.24$ ${}^{+0.49}_{-0.45}{}^{+0.31}_{-0.29}$ $\pm0.08$. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.36 GeV.

²³	CHATRCHYAN 2014K use 4.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 19.7 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV. See also CHATRCHYAN 2014AJ.

²⁴	AALTONEN 2013L combine all CDF results with $9.45 - 10.0$ fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 1.96 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV.

²⁵	ABAZOV 2013L combine all D0 results with up to 9.7 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 1.96 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV.

²⁶	AAD 2012AI obtain results based on 4.7 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV. The quoted signal strengths are given in their Fig. 10 for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 126 GeV. See also Fig. 13 of AAD 2012DA.

²⁷

CHATRCHYAN 2012N obtain results based on 4.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$=7 TeV and 5.1 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$=8 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$=125.5 GeV. See also CHATRCHYAN 2013Y .

Except where otherwise noted, content of the 2025 Review of Particle Physics is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. The publication of the Review of Particle Physics is supported by US DOE, MEXT (Japan), INFN (Italy) and CERN. Individual collaborators receive support for their PDG activities from their respective institutes or funding agencies. © 2025. See LBNL disclaimers.