1 00:00:02,610 --> 00:00:04,980 Yep, so please go ahead. 2 00:00:07,170 --> 00:00:10,770 Okay, so um I'm going to um talk about new um 3 00:00:11,840 --> 00:00:16,040 Top quark properties measurements from our ATLAS and CMS um experiments. 4 00:00:19,980 --> 00:00:25,680 um so, as you have heard several times the top quark is the most massive um elementary particle 5 00:00:25,710 --> 00:00:30,180 known to date. So it has a very short lifetime which is um shorter than the 6 00:00:30,180 --> 00:00:35,340 hadronization timescale. So no hadronic bound states can form so it's quark 7 00:00:35,340 --> 00:00:40,860 properties are accessible. Moreover, um its lifetime is shorter than the spin 8 00:00:40,860 --> 00:00:47,340 decorrelation time scale so their top quark spins stay correlated and can be measurable. 9 00:00:49,020 --> 00:00:54,030 um you can find all public results about top quark from ATLAS and CMS in these links 10 00:00:54,690 --> 00:00:58,350 here I will focus on recent measurements um from ATLAS and CMS. 11 00:01:00,000 --> 00:01:04,380 um and I'll cover top quark mass and width, Yukawa couplings, CKM matrix elements, 12 00:01:04,380 --> 00:01:08,070 asymmetries, spin correlations and um W polarization. 13 00:01:10,860 --> 00:01:17,670 um top Quark mass um can be extracted from its decay. So here um is a list of um 14 00:01:19,260 --> 00:01:27,840 measurements from CMS and ATLAS up to may 2019. For such measurements um and some 15 00:01:27,840 --> 00:01:31,920 of them are not included yet, some new measurements aren't included yet, and I'll 16 00:01:31,920 --> 00:01:38,400 talk about the ATLAS lepton plus jets from soft muon tags measurement later. 17 00:01:40,320 --> 00:01:45,960 um you can see in the blue highlighted parts the combination from Atlas combinations from 18 00:01:45,960 --> 00:01:52,620 Atlas and CMS, both have reached the precision of five hundred MeV which corresponds to 19 00:01:52,620 --> 00:01:54,210 zero point twenty eight per cent. 20 00:01:55,230 --> 00:01:59,970 And these measurements are limited by jet energy scale calibration, b tagging 21 00:02:00,000 --> 00:02:05,310 and modeling uncertainties. and there're many individual measurements with less than one GeV 22 00:02:05,340 --> 00:02:11,280 uncertainty now, and at these levels of uncertainties the interpretation of top 23 00:02:11,280 --> 00:02:16,200 mass measurements is um complicated due to non perturbative effects which can be up 24 00:02:16,200 --> 00:02:21,690 to um even one GeV. So it's important to measure top mass in well defined mass 25 00:02:21,690 --> 00:02:24,390 schemes and with independent methods. 26 00:02:27,000 --> 00:02:32,250 um one of the different methods is to extract top masses from production observables 27 00:02:32,250 --> 00:02:35,130 using total and differential ttbar cross sections. 28 00:02:36,480 --> 00:02:44,070 So here is a um summary of of these measurements, and the the two recent one ones 29 00:02:44,070 --> 00:02:50,430 from Atlas and CMS and they're also the most um precise ones. I will um talk about next 30 00:02:50,430 --> 00:02:56,280 slide. In general, these measurements are dominated by um ttr ttbar threshold production 31 00:02:56,280 --> 00:02:59,970 and there the uncertainties due to PDFs and 32 00:03:00,000 --> 00:03:04,380 higher order corrections are more important than other uncertainties. 33 00:03:08,580 --> 00:03:13,470 This measurement is from CMS using triple differential normalized cross sections 34 00:03:13,470 --> 00:03:19,530 using number of jets,um tt bar invariant mass and rapidity off the tt bar system. 35 00:03:22,200 --> 00:03:29,730 Along with that, HERA DIS data is also used to simultaneous extract PDF alpha s and 36 00:03:29,730 --> 00:03:31,050 top mass at nlo. 37 00:03:32,640 --> 00:03:39,420 um so, you can see the distribution of um TT bar rapidity, in bins of number of jets 38 00:03:39,420 --> 00:03:48,210 and um invariant mass. So, you can see that the region the threshold region, um about two top 39 00:03:48,210 --> 00:03:53,610 mass is the most sensitive region with you can see the different top mass assumptions 40 00:03:53,610 --> 00:03:53,940 here. 41 00:03:55,980 --> 00:03:59,970 um but also that's not the only sensitive region. The resulting mass 42 00:04:00,630 --> 00:04:06,720 top poll mass is hundred seventy point five GeV with a precision of zero point five percent. this is dominated 43 00:04:06,750 --> 00:04:12,630 by by bought experiments, um modeling uncertainties. And you can also see the 44 00:04:12,630 --> 00:04:18,660 alpha s value extracted from this triple differential measurement. And the this plot 45 00:04:18,660 --> 00:04:24,690 shows the significant impact on the gluon PDF at at high x values. 46 00:04:27,270 --> 00:04:34,440 um ATLAS made a measurement of top mass both top pole mass and MS bar mass using 47 00:04:34,440 --> 00:04:42,150 TT bar plus one jet events in lepton plus jets channel. For this the the rho s variable 48 00:04:42,150 --> 00:04:47,910 is used. So, this is the inverse of the TT bar plus one jet invariant mass normalized 49 00:04:47,910 --> 00:04:54,780 to a reference mass scale. And you can see the distribution of the rho s variable and the 50 00:04:54,780 --> 00:04:58,230 different poll mass assumptions and compared to data 51 00:05:00,530 --> 00:05:07,160 and the the extracted values are for MS bar masses hundred seventy two point 9 GeV and pole 52 00:05:07,160 --> 00:05:09,320 masses hundred seventy one point one 53 00:05:10,340 --> 00:05:11,030 GeV. 54 00:05:12,170 --> 00:05:19,880 So when the MS bar mass is translated to the pole mass using this formula here, we see 55 00:05:19,880 --> 00:05:25,880 that the agreement is is very well for the two measurements. And these measurements 56 00:05:25,880 --> 00:05:31,790 are dominated by scale PDF, parton shower, color connection, jet en and jet energy scale 57 00:05:31,790 --> 00:05:32,750 uncertainties 58 00:05:33,990 --> 00:05:39,420 um while the MS bar mass has somewhat larger theory uncertainty and this is due to the larger dependence 59 00:05:39,510 --> 00:05:42,480 on scales at the at the threshold 60 00:05:44,880 --> 00:05:50,520 CMS made the first experimental investigation of the running of the top quark 61 00:05:50,520 --> 00:05:56,340 mass, which is extracted at one loop precision as a function of the invariant mass 62 00:05:56,340 --> 00:06:00,000 of the TT Bar system by comparing to NLO calculations 63 00:06:01,170 --> 00:06:06,420 at the parton level and the measurement is done in the e mu channel. So, here you 64 00:06:06,420 --> 00:06:10,800 can see the TT bar invariant mass with different 65 00:06:13,550 --> 00:06:21,770 running mass predictions compared to data. And here this is the result of the of the 66 00:06:21,770 --> 00:06:28,040 measurements. So the points are the result of the nlo extraction. And this is the 67 00:06:28,070 --> 00:06:34,340 reference scale at four hundred sixty seven GeV, this is evolved using the renormalization group equations 68 00:06:34,340 --> 00:06:40,070 and you can see the agreement of data with the predictions of the renormalization group 69 00:06:40,070 --> 00:06:40,760 equations. 70 00:06:42,060 --> 00:06:49,050 um here you can see the the blue points shows the NLO extraction from inclusive TT Bar cross 71 00:06:49,050 --> 00:06:54,720 section measurement. And now this measurement is this result is evolved 72 00:06:54,780 --> 00:07:00,000 again using the renormalization group equations and then compared to the extractions 73 00:07:00,930 --> 00:07:04,920 in this analysis and you can see there's a very good agreement 74 00:07:06,120 --> 00:07:11,730 also the no running scenario is excluded at the ninety five percent confidence level. 75 00:07:12,800 --> 00:07:17,390 In this measurement the precision is limited by integrated luminosity lepton id 76 00:07:17,390 --> 00:07:18,620 jet energy scale and resolution 77 00:07:20,070 --> 00:07:22,620 and signal modeling. 78 00:07:23,730 --> 00:07:29,370 So, to improve this measurement will need the NLO calculations in the MS bar 79 00:07:29,370 --> 00:07:29,760 scheme 80 00:07:32,130 --> 00:07:39,150 Top quark mass is also measured from boosted top jet mass by CMS in the lepton plus jets 81 00:07:39,150 --> 00:07:47,070 channel. for this xcone algorithm is used to reconstruct the jet. So, you can see the 82 00:07:47,070 --> 00:07:53,850 two large radius xcone jets here from from the TT bar system and here you can see the 83 00:07:53,850 --> 00:07:59,880 hadronic leg and three there are three subjects which are again reconstructed using the xcone 84 00:08:00,000 --> 00:08:07,830 subjects and these subjects are used to reconstruct the top jet mass that the 85 00:08:07,830 --> 00:08:13,650 distribution can see here with different top mass assumptions and and the data and 86 00:08:13,650 --> 00:08:14,940 using this the 87 00:08:16,230 --> 00:08:22,170 at the particle level, the top mass is extracted to be hundred seventy two point six, the 88 00:08:22,170 --> 00:08:28,290 precision of 1.4 percent. Here the experimental uncertainties are jet energy 89 00:08:28,290 --> 00:08:36,150 scale resolution and xcone jet energy correction. for modeling final state radiation color 90 00:08:36,150 --> 00:08:43,710 reconnection, underlying event tune, and top mass value. The average energy scale of measurement is 91 00:08:43,800 --> 00:08:49,650 around four hundred eighty GeV which is significant larger than the scale in other top mass measurements. So 92 00:08:50,700 --> 00:08:56,400 this gives us an independent check at higher scales. So this measurement 93 00:08:58,740 --> 00:08:59,970 is is helping 94 00:09:00,000 --> 00:09:06,090 to understand the ambiguities between Monte Carlo and pole masses, and also eventually aim 95 00:09:06,090 --> 00:09:11,280 for analytical techniques determination in this boosted regime in the soft-collinear effective theory 96 00:09:13,440 --> 00:09:22,080 Top quark mass is also measured using soft muon tags, by by the ATLAS experiment. So 97 00:09:23,220 --> 00:09:32,040 here we have the soft muon from the B hadron and the muon from the W from the top quark decay is 98 00:09:32,040 --> 00:09:38,490 used to reconstruct an l mu invariant mass and we can see the how how the distribution 99 00:09:38,520 --> 00:09:45,630 changes for mlb for different top mass values. So the the lepton plus jets channel 100 00:09:45,660 --> 00:09:50,760 is used with the requirement of two b tagged jets, one with displaced vertex and one with 101 00:09:50,850 --> 00:09:56,970 the soft muon tag and simultaneous template fit to mlb distributions, both 102 00:09:56,970 --> 00:09:59,970 for same sign opposite sign samples have been made to 103 00:10:00,630 --> 00:10:01,620 extract the result. 104 00:10:03,330 --> 00:10:07,530 Um to to in in increase the precision of the measurement, the fragmentation function 105 00:10:07,530 --> 00:10:12,240 pythia eight is improved using a new fit to LEP data 106 00:10:13,670 --> 00:10:17,660 and also b and c hadron decay branching ratios are ad adjusted to match of the 107 00:10:18,260 --> 00:10:20,450 to match the previous measurements. 108 00:10:21,540 --> 00:10:26,220 and here you can see the post fit distribution for the m l nu 109 00:10:27,240 --> 00:10:29,040 compared to to Monte Carlo 110 00:10:30,060 --> 00:10:37,320 and the result is hundred seventy four point fourty eight GeV with a precision of zero point forty five percent. 111 00:10:38,190 --> 00:10:44,070 So here you can see this is sensitive to different modeling effects. So this this will 112 00:10:44,070 --> 00:10:46,950 also be useful for combinations as well. 113 00:10:48,900 --> 00:10:52,230 Top quark width is also measured by the ATLAS experiment 114 00:10:54,030 --> 00:10:58,560 directly using a profile likelihood template fit to m l b distribution in the dilepton 115 00:10:58,560 --> 00:11:00,000 channel and this measurement 116 00:11:00,000 --> 00:11:07,050 uses full run two data. you can see the different predictions for mlb um from 117 00:11:07,410 --> 00:11:14,190 different top width assumptions. Here you can see the post fit distribution, in the e mu 118 00:11:14,190 --> 00:11:18,930 channel and the log likelihood minimization for the top width. 119 00:11:19,260 --> 00:11:24,480 So, the measurements are compared to NLO predictions and the agreement is is 120 00:11:24,480 --> 00:11:28,770 very good and dominant uncertainties of the measurement is jet reconstruction, signal 121 00:11:28,770 --> 00:11:33,420 and background modeling, Monte Carlo statistics, flavor and flavor tagging. 122 00:11:36,270 --> 00:11:40,920 As you heard in the in the first talk of this session Yukawa coupling is also 123 00:11:40,920 --> 00:11:44,880 measured by CMS utilizing the weak corrections from 124 00:11:47,160 --> 00:11:52,530 scalar bosons that modify um differential distributions. If we have 125 00:11:52,890 --> 00:11:58,770 different Yukawa couplings which are larger than one. for the measurement, this YT variable 126 00:11:58,770 --> 00:11:59,970 is used which is the 127 00:12:00,570 --> 00:12:03,000 Yukawa coupling strength normalized to the Standard Model Yukawa coupling strength 128 00:12:05,580 --> 00:12:13,170 and the the weak corrections as a function of MTT bar and delta YTT bar for different 129 00:12:13,830 --> 00:12:20,310 Yukawa parameter values are calculated and they're applied to all TT bar samples so that 130 00:12:20,310 --> 00:12:25,110 their kinematics remain depended on YT to be able to extract YT. 131 00:12:27,480 --> 00:12:32,190 Um measurement is done in dilepton channel, requiring to opposite sign leptons and 132 00:12:32,190 --> 00:12:39,300 two b jets. Um instead of um reconstructing fully MTT bar and Delta YTT bar a partial 133 00:12:39,300 --> 00:12:44,850 reconstruction is done. And this is found to be more sensitive in the end. And here are 134 00:12:44,850 --> 00:12:53,430 the two variables used mbl and delta y bl. And here's the distribution showing m b l um 135 00:12:54,900 --> 00:12:57,780 as a function um in different bins of delta y 136 00:12:58,890 --> 00:12:59,850 b l, as well. 137 00:13:00,650 --> 00:13:06,320 And this is the post fit distribution. And here you can see the minimization of the log 138 00:13:06,320 --> 00:13:11,000 likelihood and the measurement is dominated by electroweak correction parton 139 00:13:11,000 --> 00:13:17,030 shower and matrix element scales and jet energy scale uncertainties. Measurement uses full run two 140 00:13:17,030 --> 00:13:24,800 data and the resulting YT value is one point sixteen with these uncertainties and the ninety five percent 141 00:13:24,800 --> 00:13:32,120 confidence limit for the upper limit is one point sixty two. This could be compared to the other 142 00:13:32,150 --> 00:13:38,780 CMS result that's exclusively dependent on the top Yukawa coupling, which is from top quark 143 00:13:38,780 --> 00:13:44,600 production and there the limit is at ninety five percent confidence which is at one point seven 144 00:13:45,990 --> 00:13:46,950 In fact the best 145 00:13:48,000 --> 00:13:53,730 measurement of this parameter comes from CMS Higgs combination, but it's a model 146 00:13:53,730 --> 00:13:55,410 dependent result. 147 00:13:58,440 --> 00:13:59,970 and um CMS also 148 00:14:00,000 --> 00:14:05,160 measured the CKM matrix elements from single top quark t channel using processes 149 00:14:05,160 --> 00:14:12,150 directly sensitive to V tb V td V ts matrix elements in production and decay. here are two 150 00:14:12,150 --> 00:14:17,400 example diagrams. So, in this one the V tb appears both in production and decay. here 151 00:14:17,400 --> 00:14:23,970 here it appears V tb appears in production and V tq appears in decay. the yields of 152 00:14:23,970 --> 00:14:28,410 different signals are extracted through a simultaneous fit to data in different event 153 00:14:28,410 --> 00:14:35,400 categories, there are two jet one tag, three jet one tag, three jet two tag and 154 00:14:35,400 --> 00:14:40,410 using multivariate discriminators such as the example here 155 00:14:41,010 --> 00:14:45,930 discriminating for example, this diagram from TT bar and the W plus jets 156 00:14:45,960 --> 00:14:52,290 backgrounds. And CKM matrix elements from signal strengths calculated 157 00:14:52,320 --> 00:14:55,140 from the cross section times branching ratios. 158 00:14:57,090 --> 00:15:00,000 And here are the results so a signal strength from the 159 00:15:00,000 --> 00:15:08,250 fit. And the constraints on the CKM matrix elements assuming CKM unitarity of the Standard 160 00:15:08,280 --> 00:15:16,440 model or assuming additional quark families, the extracted values for V TB 161 00:15:16,440 --> 00:15:23,910 and summed squares of these two matrix elements are here. And most interesting one is the is 162 00:15:23,910 --> 00:15:24,750 the one 163 00:15:26,370 --> 00:15:33,510 where we keep everything unconstrained and here V tb is zero point nine eight eight. And some squares are 164 00:15:33,510 --> 00:15:40,020 zero point zero six and top width normalized to the standard model one is close to one. And the 165 00:15:40,020 --> 00:15:45,660 measurement is dominated by modeling uncertainties. And these are in fact the 166 00:15:45,660 --> 00:15:50,340 first direct model independent measurements of the CKM matrix elements for the third generation 167 00:15:50,340 --> 00:15:54,630 quarks, and they are the best determinations of these um parameters. 168 00:15:57,540 --> 00:15:59,970 um CMS made the first forward backward asymmetry 169 00:16:00,000 --> 00:16:06,000 measurement at the LHC for TT bar. So the asymmetry arises due to the NLO 170 00:16:06,000 --> 00:16:11,820 interference times between q q bar diagrams and this eventually leads to 171 00:16:11,820 --> 00:16:18,720 slightly positive asymmetry. For the measurement, three variables are used cos 172 00:16:18,720 --> 00:16:20,850 theta star, MTT bar, and x f. 173 00:16:23,190 --> 00:16:23,910 And 174 00:16:25,860 --> 00:16:33,540 for cos theta star, it's defined in the TT Bar rest frame. This is analogous to the 175 00:16:33,540 --> 00:16:40,800 cos theta star used in Drell Yan AFB measurements. And then the the AFB the asymmetry is 176 00:16:40,800 --> 00:16:42,870 calculated using this this variable 177 00:16:44,760 --> 00:16:49,230 to extract the forward backward asymmetry. The measurement is done in the lepton plus jets 178 00:16:49,230 --> 00:16:53,400 final state, with resolved and boosted topologies and 179 00:16:55,020 --> 00:16:56,820 reconstructed through a kinematic fit 180 00:16:58,980 --> 00:16:59,970 And here in fact 181 00:17:00,000 --> 00:17:05,730 you can see cos theta star for different initial states q q bar, q g, and and 182 00:17:06,870 --> 00:17:07,590 gg at the at the 183 00:17:09,750 --> 00:17:13,680 simulation. And here you can see the reconstructed 184 00:17:15,170 --> 00:17:21,320 template bins for cos theta star and TTbar and x f and then from the 185 00:17:21,320 --> 00:17:26,780 fit we extract AFB to be zero point zero four eight. as you can see the measurement is dominated 186 00:17:26,810 --> 00:17:32,870 by statistical uncertainties. And the result agrees well with Tevatron NNLO QCD and 187 00:17:32,870 --> 00:17:36,170 CMS spin correlation measurements in the dilepton channel. 188 00:17:36,680 --> 00:17:39,560 measurement is also used to, to, 189 00:17:40,590 --> 00:17:44,400 to look at chromo moments of of of the top quark, 190 00:17:45,450 --> 00:17:46,860 and place limits such that um 191 00:17:48,150 --> 00:17:49,590 such limits. 192 00:17:51,300 --> 00:17:56,370 And ATLAS obtained the first evidence of charge asymmetry in the lepton plus jets 193 00:17:56,400 --> 00:17:59,910 channel again using the result on boosted topologies and using 194 00:18:00,000 --> 00:18:01,140 run two data 195 00:18:02,630 --> 00:18:04,070 and this time since this is 196 00:18:05,520 --> 00:18:13,950 like forward central asymmetry, delta y variable is used and the result is zero point zero zero six 197 00:18:13,950 --> 00:18:22,590 which differs four sigma from zero. And the NNLO prediction is zero point zero zero six four. The 198 00:18:22,590 --> 00:18:27,690 measurement is also done in bins of MTT bar as you can see here compared to NNLO 199 00:18:27,690 --> 00:18:32,400 QCD plus NLO electroweak predictions and POWHEG plus PYTHIA eight 200 00:18:32,880 --> 00:18:33,810 predictions. 201 00:18:34,830 --> 00:18:41,550 The agreement is very good both for POWHEG and NLO but it's it's it's slightly better for for 202 00:18:41,550 --> 00:18:43,350 the NNLO plus electroweak NLO corrections. 203 00:18:44,640 --> 00:18:45,960 The measurement is also 204 00:18:47,160 --> 00:18:53,760 used to place limit on some coefficients of dimension six EFT operators 205 00:18:55,980 --> 00:18:57,510 Um coming to spin correlations 206 00:18:59,100 --> 00:18:59,970 um so, spin um 207 00:19:01,260 --> 00:19:02,340 correlations 208 00:19:03,360 --> 00:19:07,950 can be characterized by the spin density matrix which is parametrized by 15 coefficients, 209 00:19:08,790 --> 00:19:14,130 which fully characterize the spin dependence of top quark pair production. And CMS 210 00:19:14,130 --> 00:19:19,350 determined these coefficients by one D angular distributions at parton level and dilepton 211 00:19:19,350 --> 00:19:24,480 channel. In addition to that, lab frame asymmetries are also measured, which are 212 00:19:24,480 --> 00:19:28,290 independent to these coefficients. So, you can see 213 00:19:29,640 --> 00:19:34,380 one of the comparisons of data NLO calculation NNLO calculation POWHEG and 214 00:19:35,700 --> 00:19:40,050 MadGraph five with fxfx merging. 215 00:19:41,100 --> 00:19:47,160 um all distributions presented in the paper and also the exacted parameters agree well 216 00:19:47,160 --> 00:19:50,460 with the standard model. Also, um 217 00:19:51,870 --> 00:19:56,670 limits on new physics is placed through anomalous couplings 218 00:19:58,740 --> 00:19:59,970 and um spin correlations 219 00:20:00,570 --> 00:20:02,250 are also measured by ATLAS 220 00:20:03,680 --> 00:20:09,620 delta phi delta t and delta phi versus m TT bar in the dilepton channel again and the 221 00:20:09,920 --> 00:20:14,900 fraction of standard model like spin correlations extracted in standard model 222 00:20:14,900 --> 00:20:19,490 this is exactly one and for the measurement both um 223 00:20:20,550 --> 00:20:24,870 templates are used for spin correlated hypothesis and uncorrelated hypothesis 224 00:20:25,950 --> 00:20:34,530 and the measurement yielded one point two for nine um which which presents 2.2 sigma difference 225 00:20:34,530 --> 00:20:35,190 between POWHEG and 226 00:20:36,450 --> 00:20:42,360 PYTHIA prediction and data. you can also see this from the distribution here the 227 00:20:42,360 --> 00:20:47,880 difference between the predictions and the data. So, this led to some alternative 228 00:20:47,880 --> 00:20:55,230 predictions with NLO QCD plus weak couplings and also NLO QCD using an 229 00:20:55,230 --> 00:20:59,280 expantial expansion of the differential distribution in powers of of the 230 00:20:59,280 --> 00:20:59,940 couplings. 231 00:21:01,140 --> 00:21:03,150 Here you can see these 232 00:21:04,770 --> 00:21:12,720 predictions from NLO um expansions and NNLO expansions. And the extracted value of the 233 00:21:12,750 --> 00:21:21,780 fraction using the NLO expanded template um comes out to be one point zero three which is perfectly 234 00:21:21,780 --> 00:21:27,900 consistent with the standard model and POWHEG plus PYTHIA eight predictions and the NLO 235 00:21:27,900 --> 00:21:31,380 predictions it is somewhat less consistent with 236 00:21:33,150 --> 00:21:34,620 with the NLO prediction. 237 00:21:36,450 --> 00:21:41,310 and the measurements are also used to place limits on top squarks in the hundred seventy two 238 00:21:41,310 --> 00:21:45,480 hundred GeV range using delta phi in of delta eta. 239 00:21:47,430 --> 00:21:53,970 Here I show the comparison of ATLAS and CMS measurements of the delta phi 240 00:21:53,970 --> 00:21:57,120 at at the parton level also compared to 241 00:21:58,230 --> 00:21:59,910 um main Monte Carlo 242 00:22:01,230 --> 00:22:05,700 used in the two experiments. You can see there is a very good 243 00:22:06,830 --> 00:22:12,500 agreement between ATLAS and CMS data points. And also very good agreement between 244 00:22:12,770 --> 00:22:15,650 ATLAS and CMS main Monte Carlo predictions. 245 00:22:16,850 --> 00:22:23,210 And we see there is a very good agreement with mg five mc at nlo with FX FX merging, 246 00:22:24,200 --> 00:22:26,660 where we have two additional jets from the matric element. 247 00:22:27,960 --> 00:22:33,510 And when you compare the measurements with the NNLO prediction, 248 00:22:34,860 --> 00:22:40,980 there's some fair agreement. That's not not perfect. So these, these were the 249 00:22:40,980 --> 00:22:41,610 first 250 00:22:43,500 --> 00:22:48,240 ATLAS CMS comparisons for for run two and this 251 00:22:49,290 --> 00:22:54,600 paves the way for the first thirteen TeV ATLAS plus CMS combination from TOP 252 00:22:57,120 --> 00:22:59,250 LHC working group. TOP LHC group also made the first 253 00:23:00,810 --> 00:23:06,330 full combination of the eight TeV data for W boson polarization from Atlas 254 00:23:06,330 --> 00:23:12,510 CMS using both TT bar and single top combination using the blue method. 255 00:23:13,740 --> 00:23:19,800 And you can see the results here W boson polarization fractions. And 256 00:23:19,920 --> 00:23:26,130 they're compared to NNLO and the agreement is very well. Precision for f zero is two 257 00:23:26,130 --> 00:23:33,300 percent and for f l it's two point five percent. And improvement in precision is twenty five percent for f zero 258 00:23:33,330 --> 00:23:41,130 twenty nine percent for FL with respect to the most precise single um measurement. um the the combination 259 00:23:41,160 --> 00:23:47,460 the combined limits for anomalous couplings, Wilson coefficients are also done. But 260 00:23:47,460 --> 00:23:48,540 I'm not showing them here. 261 00:23:49,980 --> 00:23:50,670 And 262 00:23:52,080 --> 00:23:57,480 this brings me to my conclusions. So I presented new run two LHC top mass and 263 00:23:57,480 --> 00:24:00,000 properties results with increased precision 264 00:24:00,000 --> 00:24:05,670 new methods and new observables. um top quark mass combinations reach 500 MeV 265 00:24:05,670 --> 00:24:11,400 uncertainty. And it's extracted from differential cross section measurements 266 00:24:11,400 --> 00:24:15,900 including multi differential measurements differential measurements as well. 267 00:24:17,780 --> 00:24:27,380 um it is extracted from boosted top jet jets and at an energy scale of four hundred eighty GeV, it's extracted from soft 268 00:24:27,380 --> 00:24:29,960 muon tags and also 269 00:24:31,290 --> 00:24:37,470 running off the top quark mass is tested up to one TeV. top quark width is measured using 270 00:24:37,470 --> 00:24:43,890 full run two data, similar for Yukawa coupling. First TT bar forward backward 271 00:24:43,890 --> 00:24:49,320 asymmetry measurement at LHC is presented and also first evidence of TT bar charge 272 00:24:49,320 --> 00:24:55,500 asymmetry with full run two data and precise spin correlation measurements and comparison 273 00:24:55,500 --> 00:24:59,970 between Atlas and CMS and ATLAS plus CMS W boson polarization 274 00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:05,700 combination at 8 TeV are presented. and, in many of these measurements limits on new physics 275 00:25:05,700 --> 00:25:07,200 are also placed. 276 00:25:08,610 --> 00:25:14,160 So not all the results used run two data yet, so we'll have more precise and 277 00:25:14,160 --> 00:25:19,500 varied measurements soon. And at run three, we expect two times more TT bar events and 278 00:25:19,500 --> 00:25:24,360 at high luminosity LHC 20 times more um TT bar events. Therefore, we'll be able to make 279 00:25:24,360 --> 00:25:28,260 more precise measurements and we'll have better understanding of the top 280 00:25:28,260 --> 00:25:32,700 properties. And we'll have increased reach for new physics through direct searches 281 00:25:32,700 --> 00:25:35,280 and effective field theory approaches. Thank you. 282 00:25:37,050 --> 00:25:43,950 Thanks Efe for this nice overview over those results. So please raise your hands 283 00:25:43,950 --> 00:25:46,050 to ask question, remind your name. 284 00:25:47,160 --> 00:25:49,200 Yes, Francesco. 285 00:25:52,590 --> 00:25:56,010 Go ahead. Thank you, Frederick. This is Francesco Spano from 286 00:25:56,010 --> 00:25:57,810 ATLAS. Hi um Efe 287 00:25:58,860 --> 00:26:00,000 Thanks a lot for summarizing 288 00:26:00,000 --> 00:26:07,050 All this very rich harvest of impressive results. I was wondering about your slide 289 00:26:07,050 --> 00:26:07,800 sixteen. 290 00:26:11,210 --> 00:26:15,050 I mean, the forward backward asymmetry. So 291 00:26:17,220 --> 00:26:23,730 my question is, how are the three templates defined? As you say they're 292 00:26:23,730 --> 00:26:29,220 based on models of extensions of leading order three level cross sections? Is this 293 00:26:29,220 --> 00:26:36,720 a leading order prediction? And so what is the impact of the modeling uncertainties 294 00:26:37,020 --> 00:26:41,760 on these templates on the final measurement? And then I was wondering if 295 00:26:41,790 --> 00:26:45,120 there's also any profiling on the uncertainties so it's three questions 296 00:26:45,150 --> 00:26:54,270 sorry. Okay. So in fact it's a bit complicated if if you look at the paper later, so these 297 00:26:54,270 --> 00:26:59,970 expansions so in the end, what is done here is to try to distinguish these 298 00:27:00,980 --> 00:27:06,740 three initial states and the calculations are done so, the the main asymmetry 299 00:27:06,740 --> 00:27:12,830 comes from qq bar and some from qg but not from gg and then these templates are 300 00:27:12,950 --> 00:27:19,730 calculated using those calculations. So, this is I would say effective leading 301 00:27:19,730 --> 00:27:20,840 order in the end so 302 00:27:22,290 --> 00:27:27,390 but just to have some asymmetry it approaches next leading order 303 00:27:28,950 --> 00:27:32,100 and um sorry what was the second question 304 00:27:33,750 --> 00:27:36,330 if there is any impact what is the impact of the 305 00:27:37,380 --> 00:27:42,900 theory uncertainties? Okay, I don't remember 306 00:27:42,900 --> 00:27:49,500 the numbers but as you see now the systematic uncertainties are sub dominant here, but of 307 00:27:49,500 --> 00:27:51,300 course we should have 308 00:27:53,160 --> 00:27:59,910 we should really have large modeling uncertainty when we try to separate these 309 00:28:00,870 --> 00:28:06,360 these initial states because it will depend on what simulation we do what cuts we 310 00:28:06,360 --> 00:28:11,400 impose, etc. So that should be significant when we have enough statistics that that 311 00:28:11,400 --> 00:28:13,710 I believe would be the main difficulty. 312 00:28:16,980 --> 00:28:19,260 So you're not doing any profiling, right? 313 00:28:23,550 --> 00:28:30,000 um, in the end I don't remember that, how exactly it is calculated. 314 00:28:33,120 --> 00:28:35,250 But it's, you know, it's the template fit and 315 00:28:36,870 --> 00:28:43,770 to um as you see in the plot, it's only shown qqbar and gg. And if you can separate these 316 00:28:43,770 --> 00:28:44,490 we extract afb 317 00:28:50,400 --> 00:28:52,530 any other questions or comments? 318 00:28:55,980 --> 00:28:59,970 Maybe a I have very quick one. So in light of what Fabio showed 319 00:29:00,000 --> 00:29:09,330 about the new latest developments on on the Coulomb resummation at the threshold in m 320 00:29:09,330 --> 00:29:09,720 TT bar. 321 00:29:10,830 --> 00:29:15,240 I guess this will have some influence on on your Yeah, your your coupling extraction 322 00:29:15,270 --> 00:29:22,050 or your mass measurements that you presented, right? Yes, that we need to understand better. 323 00:29:22,170 --> 00:29:27,660 But maybe at this level of precision it's not so important yet but probably 324 00:29:27,690 --> 00:29:31,620 increased precision will have much bet we'll need a much better understanding. 325 00:29:35,880 --> 00:29:36,510 Okay. 326 00:29:38,160 --> 00:29:38,850 Yes. 327 00:29:40,470 --> 00:29:47,820 I would um like to go ahead. Yeah. Hi, this is Nadjieh from um CMS DESY, just to just to 328 00:29:47,820 --> 00:29:53,550 complement the answer by Efe. In the previous analysis, the asymmetry uncertainties are 329 00:29:53,820 --> 00:29:57,570 introduced as nuisance parameters in the fit, in particular, the experimental 330 00:29:57,570 --> 00:29:57,960 ones 331 00:30:00,530 --> 00:30:02,540 Okay, thank you for the precision Nadjieh.