${{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}$ Production Cross Section in ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ Collisions at $\sqrt {s }$ = 8 TeV

INSPIRE   PDGID:
Q007TX8
Unless otherwise noted the first quoted error is from statistics, the second from systematic uncertainties, and the third from luminosity. If only two errors are quoted the luminosity is included in the systematic uncertainties.
VALUE (pb) DOCUMENT ID TECN  COMMENT
• • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • •
$243.3$ ${}^{+6.0}_{-5.9}$ 1
AAD
2023AY
 LHC ${{\mathit e}^{\pm}}{{\mathit \mu}^{\mp}}$ pair; ATLAS+CMS combined
$248.3$ $\pm0.7$ $\pm13.4$ $\pm4.7$ 2
AABOUD
2018BH
 ATLS ${{\mathit \ell}}+\not E_T+{}\geq{}$4j (${}\geq{}1{{\mathit b}}$)
$239$ $\pm4$ $\pm28$ $\pm5$ 3
AABOUD
2017Z
 ATLS ${{\mathit \tau}_{{{h}}}}+\not E_T+{}\geq{}$2j (${}\geq{}2{{\mathit b}}$)
$228.5$ $\pm3.8$ $\pm13.7$ $\pm6.0$ 4
KHACHATRYAN
2017B
 CMS ${{\mathit \ell}}+\not E_T+{}\geq{}$4j (${}\geq{}1{{\mathit b}}$)
$242.9$ $\pm1.7$ $\pm8.6$ 5
AAD
2016BK
 ATLS ${{\mathit e}}$ + ${{\mathit \mu}}$ + 1 or 2${{\mathit b}}$ jets
$244.9$ $\pm1.4$ ${}^{+6.3}_{-5.5}$ $\pm6.4$ 6
KHACHATRYAN
2016AW
 CMS ${{\mathit e}}$ + ${{\mathit \mu}}$ + $\not E_T$ + ${}\geq{}$0j
$275.6$ $\pm6.1$ $\pm37.8$ $\pm7.2$ 7
KHACHATRYAN
2016BC
 CMS ${}\geq{}$6j (${}\geq{}2{{\mathit b}}$)
$260$ $\pm1$ ${}^{+24}_{-25}$ 8
AAD
2015BP
 ATLS ${{\mathit \ell}}+\not E_T+{}\geq{}$3j (${}\geq{}1{{\mathit b}}$)
9
AAIJ
2015R
 LHCB ${{\mathit \mu}}+{}\geq{}$1j(${{\mathit b}}$-tag) forward region
$242.4$ $\pm1.7$ $\pm10.2$ 10
AAD
2014AY
 ATLS ${{\mathit e}}$ + ${{\mathit \mu}}$ + 1 or 2${{\mathit b}}$ jets
$239$ $\pm2$ $\pm11$ $\pm6$ 11
CHATRCHYAN
2014F
 CMS ${{\mathit \ell}}{{\mathit \ell}}+\not E_T+{}\geq{}$2j (${}\geq{}$1 ${{\mathit b}}$-tag)
$257$ $\pm3$ $\pm24$ $\pm7$ 12
KHACHATRYAN
2014S
 CMS ${{\mathit \ell}}+{{\mathit \tau}_{{{h}}}}+\not E_T+{}\geq{}$2j (${}\geq{}1{{\mathit b}}$)
1  AAD 2023AY based on 20 fb${}^{-1}$ of data using ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ = 172.5 GeV. The ratio of this cross section at $\sqrt {s }$ = 8 TeV to the combined cross section at $\sqrt {s }$ = 7 TeV is determined as $1.363$ $\pm0.032$. The values of cross sections as well as their ratio are consistent with the NNLO+NNLL SM predictions.
2  AABOUD 2018BH based on 20.2 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The result is for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ = 172.5 GeV. To reduce effects of uncertainties in the jet energy scale and ${{\mathit b}}$-tagging efficiency, they are included as nuisance parameters in the fit of discriminant distributions, after separating selected events into three regions. Furthermore the ${{\mathit W}}$+jets background distribution is modelled using ${{\mathit Z}}$+jets event data.
3  AABOUD 2017Z based on 20.2 fb${}^{-1}$ of data, using the mode ${{\mathit t}}$ ${{\overline{\mathit t}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit q}^{\,'}}{{\overline{\mathit q}}}{{\mathit b}}{{\overline{\mathit b}}}$ with ${{\mathit \tau}}$ decaying hadronically. Single prong and 3 prong decays of ${{\mathit \tau}}$ are separately analyzed. The result is consistent with the SM. The third quoted uncertainty is due to luminosity.
4  KHACHATRYAN 2017B based on 19.6 fb${}^{-1}$ of data, using a binned likelihood fit of templates to the data. Also the ratio ${\mathit \sigma (}{{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}$; 8 TeV${)}/{\mathit \sigma (}{{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}$; 7 TeV${)}$ = $1.43$ $\pm0.04$ $\pm0.07$ $\pm0.05$ is reported. The results are in agreement with NNLO SM predictions.
5  AAD 2016BK is an update of the value from AAD 2014AY using the improved luminosity calibration. The value $242.9$ $\pm1.7$ $\pm5.5$ $\pm5.1$ $\pm4.2$ pb is reported, where we have combined the systematic uncertainties in quadrature. Also the ratio ${\mathit \sigma (}{{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}$; 8TeV${)}/{\mathit \sigma (}{{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}$; 7TeV${)}$ = $1.328$ $\pm0.024$ $\pm0.015$ $\pm0.038$ $\pm0.001$ has been updated. The former result is consistent with the SM predictions at NNLO, while the latter result is 2.1 $\sigma $ below the expectation.
6  KHACHATRYAN 2016AW based on 19.7 fb${}^{-1}$ of data, using a binned likelihood fit to differential distributions of ${{\mathit b}}$-tagged and non-${{\mathit b}}$-tagged jets. The result is in good agreement with NNLO SM predictions.
7  KHACHATRYAN 2016BC based on 18.4 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The last uncertainty is due to luminosity. Cuts on kinematical fit probability and ${{\mathit \Delta}}{{\mathit R}}({{\mathit b}},{{\mathit b}}$) are imposed. The major QCD background is determined from the data. The result is for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ = 172.5 GeV and in agreement with the SM prediction. The top quark ${{\mathit p}_{{{T}}}}$ spectra, also measured, are significantly softer than theoretical predictions.
8  AAD 2015BP based on 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The result is for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ = 172.5 GeV and in agreement with the SM prediction $253$ ${}^{+13}_{-15}$ pb at NNLO+NNLL. Superseded by AABOUD 2018BH.
9  AAIJ 2015R, based on 2.0 fb${}^{-1}$ of data, reports $0.289$ $\pm0.043$ $\pm0.040$ $\pm0.029$ pb cross section for the forward fiducial region ${{\mathit p}_{{{T}}}}({{\mathit \mu}}$) $>$ 25 GeV, 2.0 $<$ ${{\mathit \eta}}({{\mathit \mu}}$) $<$ 4.5, 50 GeV $<$ ${{\mathit p}_{{{T}}}}({{\mathit b}}$) $<$ 100 GeV, 2.2 $<$ ${{\mathit \eta}}({{\mathit b}}$) $<$ 4.2, ${{\mathit \Delta}}{{\mathit R}}({{\mathit \mu}},{{\mathit b}}$) $>$ 0.5, and ${{\mathit p}_{{{T}}}}({{\mathit \mu}}+{{\mathit b}}$) $>$ 20 GeV. The three errors are from statistics, systematics, and theory. The result agrees with the SM NLO prediction.
10  AAD 2014AY reports $242.4$ $\pm1.7$ $\pm5.5$ $\pm7.5$ $\pm4.2$ pb value based on 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The four errors are from statistics, systematic, luminosity, and the 0.66$\%$ beam energy uncertainty. We have combined the systematic uncertainties in quadrature. The result is for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ = 172.5GeV; for other ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$, ${\mathit \sigma (}{\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}{)}$ = ${\mathit \sigma (}$172.5GeV${)}{\times }[1-0.0028{\times }({\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}-172.5$GeV)]. Also measured is the ratio ${\mathit \sigma (}{{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}$; 8TeV${)}/{\mathit \sigma (}{{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}$; 7TeV${)}$ = $1.326$ $\pm0.024$ $\pm0.015$ $\pm0.049$ $\pm0.001$. The results are consistent with the SM predictions at NNLO.
11  Based on 5.3 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The result is for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ = 172.5 GeV, and a parametrization is given in eq.(6.1) for the mean value at other ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ values. The result is in agreement with the SM prediction $252.9$ ${}^{+6.4}_{-8.6}$ pb at NNLO.
12  Based on 19.6 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The measurement is in the channel ${{\mathit t}}$ ${{\overline{\mathit t}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ( ${{\mathit b}}{{\mathit \ell}}{{\mathit \nu}}$) ( ${{\mathit b}}{{\mathit \tau}}{{\mathit \nu}}$), where ${{\mathit \tau}}$ decays into hadrons (${{\mathit \tau}_{{{h}}}}$). The result is for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ = 172.5 GeV. For ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit t}}}$ = 173.3 GeV, the cross section is lower by 3.1 pb.
References