SciPost Submission Page
Simplified Template Cross Sections -- Stage 1.1 and 1.2
by Nicolas Berger, Claudia Bertella, Matteo Bonanomi, Nihal Brahimi, Thomas P. Calvet, Milene Calvetti, Valerio Dao, Marco Delmastro, Michael Duehrssen-Debling, Paolo Francavilla, Yacine Haddad, Sarah Heim, Jelena Jovicevic, Oleh Kivernyk, Maria Moreno Llacer, Jonathon M. Langford, Changqiao Li, Giovanni Marchiori, Josh A. McFayden, Johannes K. L. Michel, Predrag Milenovic, Carlo E. Pandini, Edward Scott, Frank J. Tackmann, Kerstin Tackmann, Lorenzo Viliani, Meng Xiao, Hongtao Yang
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Frank Tackmann |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.02754v2 (pdf) |
| Date accepted: | Dec. 4, 2025 |
| Date submitted: | July 11, 2025, 3:35 p.m. |
| Submitted by: | Frank Tackmann |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Community Reports |
| for consideration in Collection: |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approaches: | Experimental, Phenomenological |
Abstract
Simplified Template Cross Sections (STXS) have been adopted by the LHC experiments as a common framework for Higgs measurements. Their purpose is to reduce the theoretical uncertainties that are directly folded into the measurements as much as possible, while at the same time allowing for the combination of the measurements between different decay channels as well as between experiments. We report the complete, revised definition of the STXS kinematic bins (stage 1.1 and stage 1.2), which have been used for the measurements by the ATLAS and CMS experiments using the full LHC Run 2 datasets. The main focus is on the four dominant Higgs production processes, namely gluon-fusion, vector-boson fusion, production in association with a vector boson and in association with a $t\bar t$ pair. We also comment briefly on the treatment of other production modes.
Current status:
Editorial decision:
For Journal SciPost Physics Community Reports: Publish
(status: Editorial decision fixed and (if required) accepted by authors)
Reports on this Submission
Report
Recommendation
Publish (meets expectations and criteria for this Journal)
Report
I find difficult to suggest any point where the article could be improved. If anything, I could suggest that, in the same way the LHC Higgs WG provides the SM predictions for the different Higgs cross sections (see https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCPhysics/LHCHWG136TeVxsec_extrap), it would be useful to have available, either in the article or in some ancilliary material, the SM predictions and uncertainties for the different STXS 1.2 bins (both at 13.6 TeV for LHC Run 3 and 14 TeV for HL-LHC projections).
Other than that, and as a very minor thing, I noticed the authors still refer in the introduction to the LHC Higgs Working Group by its old name (LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group), so they may want to update that.
I am happy to recommend this document for its publication in SciPost.
Recommendation
Publish (surpasses expectations and criteria for this Journal; among top 10%)
Report
Recommendation
Publish (surpasses expectations and criteria for this Journal; among top 10%)
Author: Frank Tackmann on 2025-11-04 [id 5986]
(in reply to Report 2 on 2025-08-13)We thank the referee for their suggestions and we apologize for the delay in response.
In principle, we agree of course that it would be extremely useful to have SM state-of-the art reference predictions for all the STXS bins available. However, such a compilation of results is unfortunately still not available at present. Providing one is clearly well beyond the scope of this paper., as it is even more involved than the compilation of the total production cross sections provided by the LHC Higgs WG, which already requires a concerted community-wide effort. We of course hope that at some point in the future this would become a reality in the context of the LHC Higgs WG or otherwise.
Regarding the old vs. new name of the WG: The place it appears in the introduction is in a historical context. The paper originally appeared when stage 1.1 was agreed upon which indeed happened before the name change. We therefore decided to keep the old name here to reflect the correct history.