Abstract
It was found that the non-perturbative corrections calculated using Pythia with the Perugia 2011 tune did not include the effect of the underlying event. The affected correction factors were recomputed using the Pythia 6.427 generator. These corrections are applied as baseline to the NLO pQCD calculations and thus the central values of the theoretical predictions have changed by a few percent with the new corrections. This has a minor impact on the agreement between the data and the theoretical predictions. Figures 2 and 6 to 13, and all the tables have been updated with the new values. A few sentences in the discussion in sections 5.2 and 9 were altered or removed. The online version of the original article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2015)153.
Highlights
PYTHIA6 Perugia2011 CTEQ5L PYTHIA6 AUET2B CTEQ6L1 PYTHIA8 4C CTEQ6L1 PYTHIA8 AU2 CTEQ6L HERWIG++ UE-EE3 CTEQ6L Uncertainty
CT10 PDF set with corrections for non-perturbative effects and electroweak effects applied are compared to the measurement
The ratios of the NLO pQCD predictions to the measured cross-sections are presented in figures [8–11]
Summary
PYTHIA6 Perugia2011 CTEQ5L PYTHIA6 AUET2B CTEQ6L1 PYTHIA8 4C CTEQ6L1 PYTHIA8 AU2 CTEQ6L HERWIG++ UE-EE3 CTEQ6L Uncertainty. CT10 PDF set with corrections for non-perturbative effects and electroweak effects applied are compared to the measurement. The ratios of the NLO pQCD predictions to the measured cross-sections are presented in figures [8–11]. The comparison is shown for the predictions using the NLO PDF sets CT10, MSTW 2008, NNPDF 2.1, HERAPDF1.5 and ABM 11 (nf = 5).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
