**Figure Caption**

Measurement of the groomed jet mass in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 5.02$ TeV from $60 < p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{ch\;jet} < 80$ GeV/$c$ with $R=0.2$ as compared to various models. Grooming is carried out using the Soft Drop algorithm with $z_\text{cut}=0.2$ and $\beta=0$. These models provide a baseline for Pb-Pb model comparisons. On the top panel, the black data points and associated vertical error bars correspond to the ALICE measurement and its statistical uncertainties, with the dashed boxes corresponding to systematic uncertainties. The data distribution is normalized to the tagging fraction. Also on the top panel, each model is presented with a box corresponding to the purely statistical uncertainties of the model calculation. Each of these models is set to have the same normalization as the data curve. On the bottom panel, the ratio of each model to ALICE data is presented. The total uncertainties on the model calculations are shown as bands around the points for each model. The grey bands around unity correspond to the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties on the measured data, added in quadrature.

PYTHIA8 Monash2013 [1] and Herwig7 (default tune) [2] are shown, as also given in the published ALICE pp measurement [3]. Additionally, a prediction from POWHEG [4] with PYTHIA matching at NLO is given, used as a baseline for the Higher-Twist parton energy loss approach to jet quenching [5]; finally, a pp baseline using the JETSCAPE framework [6] and one for the Hybrid model [7] are given.

[1] Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (Jun, 2015) 159–177, arXiv:1410.3012 [hep-ph]

[2] Eur. Phys. J. C 58 no. 4, (Nov, 2008) 639–707, arXiv:0803.0883 [hep-ph]

[3] JHEP 05 (2022) 061, arXiv:2107.11303 [nucl-ex]

[4] Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 205-206:36-41 (2010), arXiv:1007.3893 [hep-ph]

[5] Chin. Phys. C45 (2021) no. 2, 024102, arXiv:2005.01093 [hep-ph]

[6] arXiv:1903.07706 [nucl-th]

[7] JHEP 10 (2014) 019, arXiv:1405.3864 [hep-ph]