${{\mathit H}}$ SIGNAL STRENGTHS IN DIFFERENT CHANNELS

The ${{\mathit H}}$ signal strength in a particular final state ${{\mathit x}}{{\mathit x}}$ is given by the cross section times branching ratio in this channel normalized to the Standard Model (SM) value, $\sigma $ $\cdot{}$ B(${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit x}}{{\mathit x}}$) $/$ ($\sigma $ $\cdot{}$ B(${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit x}}{{\mathit x}}))_{{\mathrm {SM}}}$, for the specified mass value of ${{\mathit H}}$. For the SM predictions, see DITTMAIER 2011, DITTMAIER 2012, and HEINEMEYER 2013A. Results for fiducial and differential cross sections are also listed below.

${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ final state

INSPIRE   JSON  (beta) PDGID:
S126SWW
S126SWW
VALUE DOCUMENT ID TECN  COMMENT
$\bf{ 1.00 \pm0.08}$ OUR AVERAGE
$0.97$ $\pm0.09$ 1
CMS
2022
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
$1.09$ ${}^{+0.18}_{-0.16}$ 2, 3
AAD
2016AN
 
LHC ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV
$0.94$ ${}^{+0.85}_{-0.83}$ 4
AALTONEN
2013M
 
TEVA ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 1.96 TeV
• • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • •
$0.92$ ${}^{+0.21}_{-0.20}$ ${}^{+0.13}_{-0.12}$ $\pm0.02$ 5
AAD
2025AG
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$ $/$ ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$, 13 TeV
6
AAD
2025BK
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV, cross sections
$1.20$ $\pm0.50$ $\pm0.11$ 7
HAYRAPETYAN
2025AC
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$, 13 TeV
8
HAYRAPETYAN
2024AG
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ ($\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$), 13 TeV
9
AAD
2023AP
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV, cross sections
10
AAD
2023BV
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV, cross sections
$0.95$ ${}^{+0.10}_{-0.09}$ 11, 12
TUMASYAN
2023W
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
$0.92$ ${}^{+0.11}_{-0.10}$ 11, 13, 14
TUMASYAN
2023W
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
$0.71$ ${}^{+0.28}_{-0.25}$ 11, 13, 15
TUMASYAN
2023W
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
$2.2$ $\pm0.6$ 11, 13, 16
TUMASYAN
2023W
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
$2.0$ $\pm0.7$ 11, 13, 17
TUMASYAN
2023W
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
11, 18
TUMASYAN
2023W
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
$0.5$ $\pm0.4$ ${}^{+0.7}_{-0.6}$ 19
AAD
2022V
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ ($\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$) +2 ${{\mathit j}}$, 13 TeV
20
AAD
2022V
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ ($\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$) +2 ${{\mathit j}}$, 13 TeV
21
AABOUD
2019F
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV, cross sections
$2.5$ ${}^{+0.9}_{-0.8}$ 22
AAD
2019A
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit W}}$ $/$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit Z}}$, ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$, 13 TeV
$1.28$ ${}^{+0.17}_{-0.16}$ 23
SIRUNYAN
2019AT
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
$1.28$ ${}^{+0.18}_{-0.17}$ 24
SIRUNYAN
2019AX
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 13 TeV
$1.22$ ${}^{+0.23}_{-0.21}$ 3
AAD
2016AN
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV
$0.90$ ${}^{+0.23}_{-0.21}$ 3
AAD
2016AN
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV
25
AAD
2016AO
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 8 TeV, cross sections
$1.18$ $\pm0.16$ ${}^{+0.17}_{-0.14}$ 26
AAD
2016K
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV
$1.09$ ${}^{+0.16}_{-0.15}$ ${}^{+0.17}_{-0.14}$ 27
AAD
2015AA
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV
$3.0$ ${}^{+1.3}_{-1.1}$ ${}^{+1.0}_{-0.7}$ 28
AAD
2015AQ
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit W}}$ $/$ ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit X}}$, 7, 8 TeV
$1.16$ ${}^{+0.16}_{-0.15}$ ${}^{+0.18}_{-0.15}$ 29
AAD
2015AQ
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV
$0.72$ $\pm0.12$ $\pm0.10$ ${}^{+0.12}_{-0.10}$ 30
CHATRCHYAN
2014G
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7, 8 TeV
$0.99$ ${}^{+0.31}_{-0.28}$ 31
AAD
2013AK
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$, 7 and 8 TeV
$0.00$ ${}^{+1.78}_{-0.00}$ 32
AALTONEN
2013L
 
CDF ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 1.96 TeV
$1.90$ ${}^{+1.63}_{-1.52}$ 33
ABAZOV
2013L
 
D0 ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 1.96 TeV
$1.3$ $\pm0.5$ 34
AAD
2012AI
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 7, 8 TeV
$0.5$ $\pm0.6$ 34
AAD
2012AI
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 7 TeV
$1.9$ $\pm0.7$ 34
AAD
2012AI
 
ATLS ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 8 TeV
$0.60$ ${}^{+0.42}_{-0.37}$ 35
CHATRCHYAN
2012N
 
CMS ${{\mathit p}}$ ${{\mathit p}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit X}}$, 7, 8 TeV
1  CMS 2022 report combined results (see their Extended Data Table 2) using up to 138 fb${}^{-1}$ of data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV, assuming ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.38 GeV. See their Fig. 2 right.
2  AAD 2016AN perform fits to the ATLAS and CMS data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 and 8 TeV. The signal strengths for individual production processes are $0.84$ $\pm0.17$ for gluon fusion, $1.2$ $\pm0.4$ for vector boson fusion, $1.6$ ${}^{+1.2}_{-1.0}$ for ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$ production, $5.9$ ${}^{+2.6}_{-2.2}$ for ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ production, and $5.0$ ${}^{+1.8}_{-1.7}$ for ${{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}{{\mathit H}}$ production.
3  AAD 2016AN: In the fit, relative production cross sections are fixed to those in the Standard Model. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.09 GeV.
4  AALTONEN 2013M combine all Tevatron data from the CDF and D0 Collaborations with up to 10.0 fb${}^{-1}$ and 9.7 fb${}^{-1}$, respectively, of ${{\mathit p}}{{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 1.96 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV.
5  AAD 2025AG measure the signal strengths using ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \ell}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \ell}}{{\mathit \nu}}$ and ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \ell}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit j}}{{\mathit j}}$ (${{\mathit \ell}}$ = ${{\mathit e}}$ , ${{\mathit \mu}}$) with 140 fb${}^{-1}$ data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV. The last measurement uncertainty is due to the normalizing SM value. The signal strengths are summarized in their Table 9 and Fig. 12. The sum of ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$ and ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ cross sections times the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ branching ratio is measured to be $0.44$ ${}^{+0.10}_{-0.09}{}^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ pb and these two-dimensional likelihood scans are shown in their Fig. 14. Cross sections times the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ branching ratio and ratios to the SM values are given in their Tables 12, 13, 14 and Figs. 15 and 16, which are based on the simplified template cross section framework (reduced stage-1.2).
6  AAD 2025BK measure cross-sections times the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ branching fraction using ${{\mathit W}}$ ${{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit \ell}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \ell}}{{\mathit \nu}}$ (${{\mathit \ell}}$ = ${{\mathit e}}$ , ${{\mathit \mu}}$) with data of 140 fb${}^{-1}{{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV: $\sigma _{ggF}{\times }B({{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$) = $12.4$ ${}^{+1.3}_{-1.2}$ pb and $\sigma _{VBF}{\times }B({{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$) = $0.79$ ${}^{+0.18}_{-0.16}$ pb. See their Fig. 11 for 2-dim contours. Measured cross sections and ratios to the SM predictions in the reduced stage-1.2 simplified template cross section framework (see their Fig. 2) are shown in their Fig. 10. The results are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.09 GeV.
7  HAYRAPETYAN 2025AC measure the ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ production cross section to the SM prediction using ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ decay channel with 138 fb${}^{-1}$ and 62 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collision data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV and 13.6 TeV, respectively. Events with 4 ${{\mathit \ell}}$ (${{\mathit \ell}}$ = ${{\mathit e}}$ , ${{\mathit \mu}}$) are used. The cross section times the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ branching fraction and the signal strength for each center of mass energy are shown in their Table I. The corresponding significances are given in their Table II.
8  HAYRAPETYAN 2024AG search for the anomalous couplings of the Higgs boson to vector bosons, including $\mathit CP$ violation effects using ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$ decay channel (${{\mathit \ell}}$ = ${{\mathit e}}$ , ${{\mathit \mu}}$) with 138 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV. The anomalous HVV and Hgg coupling parameters are given in their Table 7. The data constrain the SMEFT Higgs and Warsaw bases coupling parameters as shown in their Tables 8, 9 and Fig. 12.
9  AAD 2023AP measure cross-sections times the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ branching fraction in the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$ channel using 139 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV: $\sigma _{ggF}{\times }B({{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$) = $12.0$ $\pm1.4$ pb, $\sigma _{VBF}{\times }B({{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$) = $0.75$ ${}^{+0.19}_{-0.16}$ pb, and $\sigma _{ggF+VBF}{\times }B({{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$) = $12.3$ $\pm1.3$ pb. The results are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.09 GeV. Measured cross sections and ratios to the SM predictions in the reduced stage-1.2 (see their Fig. 5) simplified template cross section framework are shown in their Table VII and Fig. 15.
10  AAD 2023BV measure fiducial total and differential cross sections of VBF process at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV with 139 fb${}^{-1}$ using ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$. The measured total fiducial cross section is $1.68$ $\pm0.33$(stat)$\pm0.23$(syst) fb in their fiducial region (Table II and Section V). See their Fig. 9 for the comparison with theory predictions. The fiducial differential cross sections are shown in their Figs. 11, 12, and 13. Wilson coefficients in the Warsaw basis at 95$\%$ confidence interval are measured; see their Table V and Fig. 16.
11  TUMASYAN 2023W measure Higgs production rates with ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV with 138 fb${}^{-1}$ data. The quoted results are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.38 GeV.
12  The quoted global signal strength is obtained assuming the relative ratios of different Higgs production modes fixed to the SM values.
13  The 4 signal strengths for gluon-fusion (ggF), VBF, ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$ and ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ modes are fit assuming ${{\mathit t}}{{\overline{\mathit t}}}{{\mathit H}}$ and ${{\mathit b}}{{\overline{\mathit b}}}{{\mathit H}}$ fixed to the SM values.
14  The quoted result is for ggF production mode.
15  The quoted result is for VBF production mode.
16  The quoted result is for ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$ production mode.
17  The quoted result is for ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ production mode.
18  Measured cross sections and ratios to the SM predictions in the reduced stage-1.2 (see their Fig. 17) simplified template cross section framework (6 ggF, 4 VBF, and 4 ${{\mathit V}}{{\mathit H}}$) are shown in their Table 18 and Fig. 26.
19  AAD 2022V measure the signal strength for ggF+2jets with 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$ data at 13 TeV.
20  AAD 2022V probe the Higgs couplings to longitudinally and transversely polarized ${{\mathit W}}$ and ${{\mathit Z}}$ using VBF (${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$ plus two jets) with 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$ of data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV. The ratios of the polarization-dependent couplings $\mathit g_{{{\mathit H}} {{\mathit V}_{{{L}}}} {{\mathit V}_{{{L}}}}}$ and $\mathit g_{{{\mathit H}} {{\mathit V}_{{{T}}}} {{\mathit V}_{{{T}}}}}$ to the Higgs-${{\mathit V}}$ coupling predicted by the SM, ${{\mathit a}_{{{L}}}}$ = $\mathit g_{{{\mathit H}} {{\mathit V}_{{{L}}}} {{\mathit V}_{{{L}}}}}/\mathit g{}^{{\mathrm {SM}}}_{ HVV}$ and ${{\mathit a}_{{{T}}}}$ = $\mathit g_{{{\mathit H}} {{\mathit V}_{{{T}}}} {{\mathit V}_{{{T}}}}}/\mathit g{}^{{\mathrm {SM}}}_{ HVV}$ are measured to be $0.91$ ${}^{+0.10}_{-0.18}{}^{+0.09}_{-0.17}$ and $1.2$ $\pm0.4$ ${}^{+0.2}_{-0.3}$, respectively, assuming the standard ${{\mathit H}}{{\mathit g}}{{\mathit g}}$ coupling. These measurements are translated into pseudo-observables of ${{\mathit \kappa}_{{{VV}}}}$ and ${{\mathit \epsilon}_{{{VV}}}}$: ${{\mathit \kappa}_{{{VV}}}}$ = $0.91$ ${}^{+0.10}_{-0.18}{}^{+0.09}_{-0.17}$ and ${{\mathit \epsilon}_{{{VV}}}}$ = $0.13$ ${}^{+0.28}_{-0.20}{}^{+0.08}_{-0.10}$, where ${{\mathit \kappa}_{{{VV}}}}$ = 1 and ${{\mathit \epsilon}_{{{VV}}}}$ = 0 for the SM. See their Tables 9 and 10.
21  AABOUD 2019F measure cross-sections times the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ branching fraction in the ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$ channel using 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV: $\sigma _{ggF}{\times }B({{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$) = $11.4$ ${}^{+1.2}_{-1.1}{}^{+1.8}_{-1.7}$ pb and $\sigma _{VBF}{\times }B({{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$) = $0.50$ ${}^{+0.24}_{-0.22}$ $\pm0.17$ pb.
22  AAD 2019A use 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$ data at 13 TeV. The cross section times branching fraction values are measured to be $0.67$ ${}^{+0.31}_{-0.27}{}^{+0.18}_{-0.14}$ pb for ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit H}}$, ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ and $0.54$ ${}^{+0.31}_{-0.24}{}^{+0.15}_{-0.07}$ pb for ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$, ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$.
23  SIRUNYAN 2019AT perform a combine fit to 35.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of data at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 13 TeV.
24  SIRUNYAN 2019AX measure the signal strengths, cross sections and so on using gluon fusion, VBF and ${{\mathit V}}{{\mathit H}}$ production processes with 35.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of data. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.09 GeV. Signal strengths for each production process is found in their Fig. 9. Measured cross sections and ratios to the SM predictions in the stage-0 simplified template cross section framework are shown in their Fig. 10. ${{\mathit \kappa}_{{{F}}}}$ = $1.52$ ${}^{+0.48}_{-0.41}$ and ${{\mathit \kappa}_{{{V}}}}$ = $1.10$ $\pm0.08$ are obtained (see their Fig. 11 (right)).
25  AAD 2016AO measure fiducial total and differential cross sections of gluon fusion process at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV with 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ using ${{\mathit H}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit W}}{{\mathit W}^{*}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\mathit e}}{{\mathit \nu}}{{\mathit \mu}}{{\mathit \nu}}$. The measured fiducial total cross section is $36.0$ $\pm9.7$ fb in their fiducial region (Table 7). See their Fig. 6 for fiducial differential cross sections. The results are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV.
26  AAD 2016K use up to 4.7 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and up to 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.36 GeV.
27  AAD 2015AA use 4.5 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The signal strength for the gluon fusion and vector boson fusion mode is $1.02$ $\pm0.19$ ${}^{+0.22}_{-0.18}$ and $1.27$ ${}^{+0.44}_{-0.40}{}^{+0.30}_{-0.21}$, respectively. The quoted signal strengths are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.36 GeV.
28  AAD 2015AQ use 4.5 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 20.3 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.36 GeV.
29  AAD 2015AQ combine their result on ${{\mathit W}}$ $/$ ${{\mathit Z}}{{\mathit H}}$ production with the results of AAD 2015AA (gluon fusion and vector boson fusion, slightly updated). The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.36 GeV.
30  CHATRCHYAN 2014G use 4.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 19.4 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The last uncertainty in the measurement is theory systematics. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.6 GeV.
31  AAD 2013AK use 4.7 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 20.7 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.5 GeV. Superseded by AAD 2015AA.
32  AALTONEN 2013L combine all CDF results with $9.45 - 10.0$ fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 1.96 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV.
33  ABAZOV 2013L combine all D0 results with up to 9.7 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\overline{\mathit p}}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 1.96 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125 GeV.
34  AAD 2012AI obtain results based on 4.7 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 5.8 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The quoted signal strengths are given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 126 GeV. See also AAD 2012DA.
35  CHATRCHYAN 2012N obtain results based on 4.9 fb${}^{-1}$ of ${{\mathit p}}{{\mathit p}}$ collisions at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 7 TeV and 5.1 fb${}^{-1}$ at $\mathit E_{{\mathrm {cm}}}$ = 8 TeV. The quoted signal strength is given for ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit H}}}$ = 125.5 GeV. See also CHATRCHYAN 2013Y.
References