- #1

- 3,381

- 463

I'm referring to this paper :

https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.05394

and in particular Table 2, the mass of the 2nd heavy neutralino [itex]m_{\tilde{\chi}_2}[/itex] is negative: [itex]m_{\tilde{\chi}_2}=-135.3 \text{ GeV}[/itex] .

Can it be a typo? (it has to be).

Also something more... concerning the light scalar Higgs [itex]m_{H_1}=93.8 \text{GeV}[/itex]... I was told that LEP extensively studied that mass range [without any evidence of a new particle]. Though, in the paper it's stated that they used for their fittings results from LEP as well how could they create such a Benchmark Model? In particular how would such a field still exist there while avoiding the previous searches (how exotic properties would it need to have)?

Finally, going into the "experiment" part of the paper, they give the plots of the centrality fraction [itex]f_{cent} = \frac{E^{\Delta R<0.1}}{E^{\Delta R<0.2}}[/itex] and the ratio of the 2- over 1- subjetiness, [itex]\tau_{12}[/itex].

My question mainly comes from their comment that:

To be honest, from Figure 3 I see the complete opposite: I can by eye (not even using BDT) cut most of the "QCD" components, something that I can generally do for all the plots for the tau-leptons.ts issued

from the fragmentation of light quarks are always harder to distinguish from ditau boosted objects, as their properties are similar to the ditau case (see Figure 3).

subnote:

Also I would be interested to hearing from someone what is the boosted ditau tagging (such as the one shown in Fig7 left pannel- it's not really mentioned within the paper), and if anyone has a clue about how the systematics over Background of 3% and 1% (not even conservative) were taken at the right pannel.