18693 research outputs found
Sort by
A New Avenue for Higgs Boson Self-Coupling Measurements: Combined Searches for Higgs Pairs in Multilepton Final States with the ATLAS Experiment
No full textThe Higgs boson self-coupling (λ) is a fundamental parameter of the Standard Model that sets the shape of the Higgs potential and probes the mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking. This coupling can be directly measured through Higgs boson pair production (HH), which has a predicted production rate roughly 1000 times smaller than single-Higgs production at the LHC.
A combined search for non-resonant Higgs boson pair production in final states with multiple light leptons (e,µ), hadronically decaying τ leptons, and photons is presented, using 140 fb−1 of 13 TeV proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the LHC (2015-2018). Nine final states are analyzed, targeting HH decays to WW, ZZ, ττ, bb, and γγ in combinations that produce multiple leptons. This is the first ATLAS analysis to explore these multilepton topologies for Higgs pair production. The channels complement existing ATLAS searches in the bbγγ, bbττ, bbbb, and bbℓℓ final states.
The multilepton analysis alone excludes Higgs boson pair production above 17 times the Standard Model prediction (11 expected) at 95% confidence level. Combined with other Run 2 ATLAS searches, the observed (expected) limit reaches 2.9 (2.4) times the SM prediction. The observed Higgs self-coupling κλ is constrained to [−1.2, 7.2], and the HHV V coupling κ2V is constrained to [0.6, 1.5] at 95% confidence level, both consistent with Standard Model predictions. These are the most stringent constraints on HH production to date.
High pileup degrades lepton isolation performance by adding energy deposits in the ATLAS calorimeters, reducing the ability to distinguish prompt leptons from jets. A pileup correction method for particle-flow-based electron isolation is presented that accounts for the pseudorapidity dependence of pileup density in the detector. This method improves electron isolation efficiency in high-pileup environments and establishes an approach for future LHC runs.
Projections for the High-Luminosity LHC are presented for the multilepton channels, extending the Run 2 analysis framework to 3000 fb−1 under four systematic uncertainty scenarios. The multilepton channels are projected to exclude HH production at 2.1 times the SM prediction in the baseline scenario. Combined ATLAS and CMS projections report that the HH signal strength could be measured to approximately 30% precision and κλ constrained to ±0.4 at 68% confidence level under optimistic scenarios. These projections were a major input to the 2026 European Strategy Update for Particle Physics
Rethinking Juror Impartiality
No full textJury impartiality in the contemporary court often justifies the perpetuation
of exclusionary selection practices that make juries more—not less—biased.
This Article calls for a rethinking of this important but flawed concept. Constitutional
interpretations and conceptions of “impartiality” frame it as a transient
orientation toward particular evidence or parties. Yet, during voir dire, the prevailing
conception of jury impartiality is that it is an immutable character trait
that must be discovered—if not created—by professional legal actors. What voir
dire creates is not an impartial jury, but precisely the opposite: a venire shaped
by the strategic biases of lawyers.
This Article offers an alternative. The presumption of impartiality applied
to judges should inspire a new approach to their lay counterparts. The norms of
judicial impartiality show that the criminal legal system largely assumes judges
are, unless shown otherwise, impartial actors who deserve discretion to decide
whether their relationship to a case warrants recusal. In this way, impartiality is
something a legal actor must take responsibility for in their role in the trial. Prospective
jurors should be empowered in the same way. By reforming voir dire
techniques already in use, courts can hold jurors to a comparable standard of
impartiality and dispense with the advantage-seeking ethos of jury selection that
allows lawyers to impute partiality to prospective jurors. This reform will help
juries realize an ideal of impartiality premised on representativeness rather than
exclusion and empower jurors to take greater responsibility for their special role in
the legal process
Disenchanting Consent
No full textDespite being criticized as a flawed mechanism for data protection, con- sent has witnessed a revival in the recent wave of state privacy statutes. One factor that contributed to the revival may be the widely held belief that con- sent constitutes the “cornerstone” of data privacy laws. This Article conducts a comparative historical survey to examine the validity of this belief. The findings are twofold. First, contrary to what many believe, consent has been playing a limited role in global data privacy laws. Second, consent is an inherently defective mechanism for data protection. Some of its problems have existed since the inception of modern data privacy laws, and attempts to address them and safeguard consent will likely be doomed. These findings disenchant con- sent and signify the need to look beyond it. Reform efforts should focus on other areas of data privacy laws, a lesson with implications for states with new laws or bills that reinforce the role of consent
History\u27s Identity Crisis
No full textLower court judges across the country are struggling to manage the Supreme Court’s new “history and tradition” test that applies to Second Amendment challenges. This Article articulates one fundamental reason for the struggle: nobody is quite sure what a judge is actually doing when she evaluates claims about what happened in the past. Is it traditional legal reasoning—weighing evidence and looking for patterns? Is it fact-finding of the sort we think expert historians should testify about—conveying to a trial judge the best evidence we have about the purpose of colonial gun laws? Or is it a different sort of fact-finding—generalized and closer to policy—such that we want appellate judges to make the calls after studying in the law library or digesting dozens of amicus briefs? Each alternative identity carries significant practical litigation consequences, and—because of those consequences—the players are motivated to manipulate the different labels in strategic ways.
I call for some nuance and “bottom-line thinking”: if what really matters is who makes the decision and under what conditions, then we should ask that question directly and specifically rather than getting hung up in definitions and labels. This Article assumes a good-faith judge confronting a history-based test in the Second Amendment context and then offers a way to help: by detangling this identity crisis, exploring the implications of each alternative identity, and then offering preliminary thoughts on a possible path forward
The Persistence of Common Law Limits on Armed Travel in the Early Republic: Surety and Affray Laws in Historical Context
No full textIn New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court abandoned the two-step test that had emerged after its landmark, but controversial ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller. The new approach announced in Bruen rejected the second prong of this test, casting aside means end scrutiny, or balancing, in favor of a “text, history, and tradition” approach. More recently, in United States v. Rahimi, the Court clarified some of the confusion over its Bruen test. One ongoing problem that lawyers and judges face when implementing this framework flows from the nature of materials required by the historical approach. Early American legal materials are often not easy to locate, and serious gaps in both the historical record and scholarship exist. Moreover, interpreting these materials requires an understanding of Anglo-American common law in the Founding Era. To be sure, most lawyers do get a smattering of common law in their law school course work, but learning to think and read like a Founding Era lawyer, the foundational claim that supports modern originalism, including Second Amendment jurisprudence, places much greater demands on lawyers and judges to think in common law terms about Founding Era law. Rather than apply the Founders’ common law, many jurists and legal scholars have resorted to a form of “common law lite,” a caricature that bears scant resemblance to the way common law functioned in early America. The problems with this “common law lite” approach emerge clearly in the way Bruen and its defenders have interpreted the role of sureties and early statutes prohibiting affray and traveling armed with offensive weapons. Implementing text, history, and tradition requires a more sophisticated approach to the past, one shaped by rigorous historical research and a more serious engagement with the Founders’ common law
The Duality of Perception: Unveiling the Hidden Through Visible Forms
No full textThis MFA thesis, The Duality of Perception: Unveiling the Hidden through Visible Form, involves layering paints on shaped wood panels and paper, using the traditional technique of tezhib (gold illumination) and geometric art. Through these layers, I aim to challenge the viewers’ perceptions by simultaneously revealing and concealing elements within the work. Symbols drawn from Islamic traditions such as pomegranates, birds, and ribbons are incorporated in the paintings to carry both cultural and personal significance, evoking my connections to spiritual and physical realms.
Rooted in the principles of Islamic art and informed by spiritual themes such as paradise, divine harmony, and interconnectedness, this thesis investigates the duality of dhahir (the visible) and batin (the hidden) within my artistic practice. My exploration of these themes is shaped by my lived experiences, including my Pakistani traditions, memories, and values passed down through my family heritage, which together enrich the visual narrative and deepen the dialogue between what is seen on the surface and the emotions and meanings that lie beneath the imagery.
In my work, geometry and abstraction serve not only as aesthetic tools but as portals for transcendence, inviting contemplation and inner reflection. By exploring the hidden meanings within visible forms, my art becomes a means of unveiling the mysteries that lie beneath the surface
The Fourth Amendment\u27s Hidden Intrusion Doctrine
No full textThe Fourth Amendment’s concept of probable cause is the linchpin of legal standards governing law enforcement actions such as arrests, searches, and seizures. This article challenges the assumption that the same quantum of evidence can meet the probable cause standard regardless of whether law enforcement seek to conduct a search, to seize evidence, or to make an arrest, and regardless of the intrusiveness of such search or seizure. This paper demonstrates that the Supreme Court implicitly considers the degree of intrusion into privacy or liberty, not just the quantum or quality of evidence, when determining whether probable cause exists. In doing so, I bring to light the Supreme Court’s “hidden intrusion doctrine.”
By failing to explicitly state that degree of intrusion is a factor in the probable cause analysis, the Supreme Court injects ambiguity that has many consequences. Some lower courts and law enforcement agencies already balance the quantum or quality of evidence with the severity of intrusion, even without explicit Supreme Court guidance, but others do not. The ambiguity in the doctrine therefore fosters inconsistency and expands police discretion. Moreover, as technological advancements reshape investigative techniques, from facial recognition to digital searches, the need for a clear articulation of the probable cause standard is increasingly urgent.
This article suggests both doctrinal and policy-based proposals that would bring the Supreme Court’s intrusion doctrine out of the shadows and require deliberate consideration of the degree of intrusion in probable cause determinations. Such an approach would preserve law enforcement flexibility while safeguarding individual rights amidst evolving technological landscapes
The Contracts Clause Can Be Enforced via Section 1983, Period: The Nonexistent Circuit Court Split”
No full textThe Federal Circuit Courts are apparently split on whether 42 U.S.C. § 1983—which provides a civil cause of action for constitutional deprivation of rights— applies to actions brought under the Contracts Clause in article 1 of the U.S. Constitution. The “split” has existed since 2017 and a new case out of the Sixth Circuit seeks to end that constitutional discrepancy via cert petition. The case, however, is a suboptimal vehicle for ending this circuit court stalemate.
The Sixth and Fourth Circuits have held that Section 1983 does not apply to actions brought under the Contracts clause. The Ninth Circuit has explicitly held that it does. And the Second, Third and Eighth Circuits have applied Section 1983 to Contracts Clause claims without expressly addressing the issue.
But the “split” created by both the Sixth and Fourth Circuits is based on flimsy precedent. The holdings are based on curious interpretations of prior case law and conclusions were reached in breach of the principle of party presentation, without the benefit of the parties’ fulsome arguments. A proper hearing of a case with an appropriate procedural history would undoubtedly clear this “split” in favor of litigants seeking to enforce their rights under the Contracts Clause.
In short order, the relevant legal authorities indicate that there is no split at all
A Comparative Time Series Analysis of the ARIMA and Temporal Fusion Transformer (TFT) Models
No full textSeveral new transformer-based time series models have been developed in the past five years and research has provided evidence of these models’ superior performance compared to classic statistical models such as ARIMA. While transformer-based models show impressive performance on baseline datasets, no research has been done on the robustness of these models on datasets with controlled modifications and in a replicable manner. In this paper, the Temporal Fusion Transformer (TFT) model was compared to the classical statistical model ARIMA on simulated data using multiple horizons. Data were simulated using a linear combination of exogenous variables; in total, 50 realizations of 52,704 observations were simulated. The comparison tests, which introduced controlled modifications, included 1) a baseline comparison on the simulated data, 2) simulated data with reduced noise, 3) simulated data with increased noise, 4) a reduction of training data, and 5) a nonlinear combination of the target variable. The TFT and ARIMA models were compared using mean squared error (MSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) on various horizons. Results showed that the ARIMA produced lower average error metrics than the TFT across all horizons and under all modified conditions