Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Constraining the four-light quark operators in the SMEFT with multijet and VBF processes at linear level

Céline Degrande, Matteo Maltoni

TL;DR

This work constrains ten four-light-quark SMEFT operators by studying their interference with the SM in multijet and VBF-like processes at LO, across multijet, Z+jets, W+jets, and γ+jets channels. The analysis uses a MadGraph5_aMC@NLO framework with a dedicated 4LQ UFO model, MLM matching for up to three jets, and Pythia8 parton showering, evaluating differential observables to identify the most sensitive directions in the operator space. By constructing a χ^2 that combines SM, interference, and potential quadratic contributions, the authors extract both individual and marginalised bounds, finding that the direction associated with $C_{qq}^{(3)}/\Lambda^2$ is typically best constrained, with multijet data providing the strongest limits. They highlight that, at current energies, the $O(1/\Lambda^4)$ squared terms are often comparable to or dominate over the linear interference, emphasizing the need to account for quadratic effects and to improve SM predictions and observable sensitivity for tighter SMEFT constraints.

Abstract

We investigate how the interference of the SM with ten four-light quark operators in the SMEFT can be constrained thanks to multijet and $Z,W,γ$ VBF production in association with jets. The differential distributions for each process are generated at LO for different jet multiplicities, that are then merged and showered. We check which observables provide better bounds on the Wilson coefficients, and what directions in the ten-dimensional coefficient space they are able to probe. We discuss the relevance of the quadratic contributions with respect to the linear terms.

Constraining the four-light quark operators in the SMEFT with multijet and VBF processes at linear level

TL;DR

This work constrains ten four-light-quark SMEFT operators by studying their interference with the SM in multijet and VBF-like processes at LO, across multijet, Z+jets, W+jets, and γ+jets channels. The analysis uses a MadGraph5_aMC@NLO framework with a dedicated 4LQ UFO model, MLM matching for up to three jets, and Pythia8 parton showering, evaluating differential observables to identify the most sensitive directions in the operator space. By constructing a χ^2 that combines SM, interference, and potential quadratic contributions, the authors extract both individual and marginalised bounds, finding that the direction associated with is typically best constrained, with multijet data providing the strongest limits. They highlight that, at current energies, the squared terms are often comparable to or dominate over the linear interference, emphasizing the need to account for quadratic effects and to improve SM predictions and observable sensitivity for tighter SMEFT constraints.

Abstract

We investigate how the interference of the SM with ten four-light quark operators in the SMEFT can be constrained thanks to multijet and VBF production in association with jets. The differential distributions for each process are generated at LO for different jet multiplicities, that are then merged and showered. We check which observables provide better bounds on the Wilson coefficients, and what directions in the ten-dimensional coefficient space they are able to probe. We discuss the relevance of the quadratic contributions with respect to the linear terms.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 26 sections, 7 equations, 10 figures, 8 tables.

Figures (10)

  • Figure 1: Shapes of the differential cross section with respect to χ_{jj} for the SM and its interference with the 4LQ operators, for the dominant subprocess uu → uu to dijet production at LO. PDF and PS effects are not included
  • Figure 2: Differential ( top) and normalised ( bottom) distributions of the exponential of the azimuthal distance among the two leading jets in multijet production, for the SM ( black) and the contributing 4LQ operators, with all the coefficients set to C_i/Λ^2 = 1 TeV^{-2}. Two dijet invariant-mass regions are shown: [2.4, 3] TeV ( left) and [6, 13] TeV ( right). The numerical uncertainties are represented with shaded bands in both plots, while the scale variations are shown in hatched bands in both plots for the SM, and only on top for the 4LQ operators. Note that the cross-section unit is not the same in the two top plots. The experimental measurements are also included in the bottom plots
  • Figure 3: Differential distributions of the transverse momentum of the b-tagged jets in the b+jets region for multijet production, for the SM ( black) and the contributing operators at LO, with all the coefficients set to C_i/Λ^2 = 1 TeV^{-2}. The numerical uncertainties are represented with shaded bands, while the scale variations are shown in hatched bands for the SM only. The last bin includes the overflow
  • Figure 4: Differential ( top) and normalised ( bottom) distributions of the azimuthal distance between the two leading jets in ℓ^+ ℓ^- +jets production, for the SM ( black) and the interference of the ten operators included in this analysis at LO, with all the coefficients set to C_i/Λ^2 = 1 TeV^{-2}. The numerical uncertainties are represented with shaded bands in both plots, while the scale variations are shown in hatched bands in both plots for the SM, and only on top for the 4LQ operators. The experimental measurements are also included
  • Figure 5: LO differential ( top) and normalised ( bottom) distributions of the azimuthal distance among the two leading jets in ℓ^± ν+jets production, for the SM ( black) and the operators that contribute, with all the coefficients set to C_i/Λ^2 = 1 TeV^{-2}. The numerical uncertainties are represented with shaded bands in both plots, while the scale variations are shown in hatched bands in both plots for the SM, and only on top for the 4LQ operators
  • ...and 5 more figures