Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected and observed CLs values per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed CLs values per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed CLs values per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed CLs values per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed cross-section upper-limit per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed cross-section upper-limit per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed cross-section upper-limit per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed cross-section upper-limit per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Event selection cutflows for signal samples with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 150 GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^\pm, \tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 1.5, 1.0, and 0.75 GeV, including all six production processes ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$). The cross-section used to obtain the initial number of events ($\sigma(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{jets}}) \geq 1$) refers to an emission of at least one gluon or quark with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 50$ GeV at the parton level.

Event selection cutflows for signal samples with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 150 GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^\pm, \tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 1.5, 1.0, and 0.75 GeV, including all six production processes ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$). The cross-section used to obtain the initial number of events ($\sigma(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{jets}}) \geq 1$) refers to an emission of at least one gluon or quark with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 50$ GeV at the parton level.

Event selection cutflows for signal samples with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 150 GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^\pm, \tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 0.5, 0.35, and 0.25 GeV, including all six production processes ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$). The cross-section used to obtain the initial number of events ($\sigma(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{jets}}) \geq 1$) refers to an emission of at least one gluon or quark with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 50$ GeV at the parton level.

Event selection cutflows for signal samples with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 150 GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^\pm, \tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 0.5, 0.35, and 0.25 GeV, including all six production processes ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$). The cross-section used to obtain the initial number of events ($\sigma(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{jets}}) \geq 1$) refers to an emission of at least one gluon or quark with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 50$ GeV at the parton level.

R32 for $H_{T2}$, 0.2 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R32 for $H_{T2}$, 0.3 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R32 for $H_{T2}$, pT,jet

R32 for delta y

R32 for delta y max

R32 for $m_{jj}$

R32 for $m_{jj, max}$

R43 for $H_{T2}$, 60 GeV < $p_{T,3}$

R43 for $H_{T2}$, 0.1 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R43 for $H_{T2}$, 0.3 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R43 for $H_{T2}$, pT,jet

R43 for $Delta y_{jj}$

R43 for $Delta y_{jj, max}$

R43 for $m_{jj}$

R43 for $m_{jj, max}$

R54 for $H_{T2}$, 60 GeV < $p_{T,3}$

R54 for $H_{T2}$, 0.1 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R54 for $H_{T2}$, 0.3 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R54 for $Delta y_{jj}$

R54 for $Delta y_{jj, max}$

R54 for $m_{jj}$

R54 for $m_{jj, max}$

R42 for $H_{T2}$, 60 GeV < $p_{T,3}$

R42 for $H_{T2}$, 0.1 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R42 for $H_{T2}$, 0.3 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R42, pT,jet

R42 for $Delta y_{jj}$

R42 for $Delta y_{jj, max}$

R42 for $m_{jj}$

R42 for $m_{jj}$

HT2, $p_{T,3}$ > 60 GeV, $N_{jet}$ >= 2

HT2, $p_{T,3}$ > 60 GeV, $N_{jet}$ >=3

HT2, $p_{T,3}$ > 60 GeV, $N_{jet}$ >=4

HT2, $p_{T,3}$ > 60 GeV, $N_{jet}$ >= 5

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.05, $N_{jet}$ >= 2

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.05, $N_{jet}$ >=3

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.05, $N_{jet}$ >=4

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.05, $N_{jet}$ >= 5

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.10, $N_{jet}$ >= 2

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.10, $N_{jet}$ >=3

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.10, $N_{jet}$ >=4

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.10, $N_{jet}$ >= 5

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.20, $N_{jet}$ >= 2

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.20, $N_{jet}$ >=3

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.20, $N_{jet}$ >=4

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.20, $N_{jet}$ >= 5

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.30, $N_{jet}$ >= 2

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.30, $N_{jet}$ >=3

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.30, $N_{jet}$ >=4

HT2, $p_{T,3}$/HT2 > 0.30, $N_{jet}$ >= 5

pTnincl

pTnincl

pTnincl

mjj max, $N_{jet}$ >= 2

mjj max, $N_{jet}$ >= 3

mjj max, $N_{jet}$ >= 4

mjj max, $N_{jet}$ >= 5

$m_{jj}$ $N_{jet}$ >= 2

$m_{jj}$ $N_{jet}$ >= 3

$m_{jj}$ $N_{jet}$ >= 4

$m_{jj}$ $N_{jet}$ >= 5

$Delta y_{jj}$ $N_{jet}$ >= 2

$Delta y_{jj}$ $N_{jet}$ >= 3

$Delta y_{jj}$ $N_{jet}$ >= 4

$Delta y_{jj}$ $N_{jet}$ >= 5

$Delta y_{jj, max}$, $N_{jet}$ >= 2

$Delta y_{jj, max}$, $N_{jet}$ >= 3

$Delta y_{jj, max}$, $N_{jet}$ >= 4

$Delta y_{jj, max}$, $N_{jet}$ >= 5

R32 for $H_{T2}$, 60 GeV < $p_{T,3}$

R32 for $H_{T2}$, 0.05 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R32 for $H_{T2}$, 0.1 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R32 for $H_{T2}$, 0.2 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

R32 for $H_{T2}$, 0.3 x $H_{T2} < $p_{T,3}$

Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Mean multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Mean multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Mean multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the towards region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$

Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the transverse region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Central $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins, Forward $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund} \gt$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Inclusive $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Central $\eta$

$\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$, Forward $\eta$

Inclusive $\lt N_{Lund} \gt$

Inclusive $\lt N_{Lund}^{Primary} \gt$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 0.5~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 1.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 2.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 5.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 10.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 20.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $300~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 500~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 50.0~\text{GeV}$, $1250~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 4500~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

Data Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, All $p_T$ bins

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $500~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 750~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $750~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1000~\text{GeV}$

MC Stat. Covariance, $N_{Lund}^{Primary}, k_t \geq 100.0~\text{GeV}$, $1000~\text{GeV} \leq p_T < 1250~\text{GeV}$

Post-fit agreement between data and MC prediction for the $SR_{\mathrm{loose}}^{1\ell6ji}$ signal region, which uses the jet multiplicity, $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$, as an observable. The hatched uncertainty bands include all uncertainties and their correlations. The last bins contain overflow events. "Other Top" includes single-top-quark production and associated production of $t\bar{t}$ and single top quarks with bosons. "Non-Top" includes W+jets, Z+jets, and diboson processes.

Post-fit agreement between data and MC prediction for the $SR_{\mathrm{tight}}^{1\ell6ji}$ signal region, which uses the jet multiplicity, $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$, as an observable. The hatched uncertainty bands include all uncertainties and their correlations. The last bins contain overflow events. "Other Top" includes single-top-quark production and associated production of $t\bar{t}$ and single top quarks with bosons. "Non-Top" includes W+jets, Z+jets, and diboson processes.

Post-fit agreement between data and MC prediction for the $SR_{\mathrm{loose}}^{2\ell4ji}$ signal region, which uses the jet multiplicity, $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$, as an observable. The hatched uncertainty bands include all uncertainties and their correlations. The last bins contain overflow events. "Other Top" includes single-top-quark production and associated production of $t\bar{t}$ and single top quarks with bosons. "Non-Top" includes W+jets, Z+jets, and diboson processes.

Post-fit agreement between data and MC prediction for the $SR_{\mathrm{tight}}^{2\ell4ji}$ signal region, which uses the jet multiplicity, $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$, as an observable. The hatched uncertainty bands include all uncertainties and their correlations. The last bins contain overflow events. "Other Top" includes single-top-quark production and associated production of $t\bar{t}$ and single top quarks with bosons. "Non-Top" includes W+jets, Z+jets, and diboson processes.

Jet multiplicity and tagging criteria for the SRs and CRs in the single-lepton and dilepton channels. All single-lepton regions are defined in the 5-jet-exclusive and 6-jet-inclusive jet selections, all dilepton regions in the 3-jet-exclusive and 4-jet-inclusive jet selections. By construction, $\mathrm{SR}^{2\ell}_{\mathrm{tight}}$ only exists for the 4-jet-inclusive selection. Identical requirements on inclusive and exclusive working points, e.g., one c@22% and one c@11% in the $\mathrm{CR}_1^{1\ell}$, indicate a veto of additional tags at the inclusive working point.

Breakdown of the fiducial $t\bar{t}+{\geq}2c$ and $t\bar{t}+1c$ cross-section uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties are grouped into signal and background modeling, instrumental, and MC statistics categories. The table lists the fractional uncertainty in the measured cross-sections in percent and is estimated from the covariance matrix of the profile likelihood fit, following EPJC 84 (2024) 593. Individual groups of uncertainties can be added in quadrature to obtain the total uncertainty. JES and JER denote the jet energy scale and resolution uncertainties, respectively. The fractional uncertainties in the fitted $t\bar{t}+{\geq}1c$ and $t\bar{t}+\text{light}$ normalization factors are included in the data statistics category. For presentation purposes, all uncertainties are symmetrized.

Measured fiducial cross-section values in comparison with various NLO+PS predictions. The uncertainties in the predictions include independent and simultaneous variations of the $\mu_R$ and $\mu_F$ scales and uncertainties in the choice of the PDF set, but no uncertainties in the parton shower or hadronization. The uncertainties in the measured values include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. For presentation purposes, the quoted measurement and prediction uncertainties are symmetrized.

Measured and predicted values for the $t\bar{t}+{\geq}1b$, $t\bar{t}+{\geq}2c$, and $t\bar{t}+1c$ cross-sections and for the cross-section ratios of these processes to total $t\bar{t}+\text{jets}$ production. The quoted uncertainties in the measurements include statistical and systematic uncertainties. The predictions are taken from the nominal setup using inclusive $t\bar{t}$ Powheg+Pythia8 predictions for the $t\bar{t}+{\geq}2c$, $t\bar{t}+1c$, and $t\bar{t}+\text{light}$ processes, and $t\bar{t}+b\bar{b}$ Powheg+Pythia8 predictions for the $t\bar{t}+{\geq}1b$ process. The first use the 5FS, the latter the 4FS, where the $b$-quarks are treated as massive particles and are included in the matrix element calculation. The uncertainties in the predictions include independent and simultaneous variations of the $\mu_R$ and $\mu_F$ scales and uncertainties in the choice of the PDF set.

Nuisance parameters with a large impact on the fiducial measurement: ranking of the ten most impactful nuisance parameters for the $t\bar{t}+{\geq}2c$ cross-section measurement. The colored boxes indicate the impact of the nuisance parameters, $\Delta\mu$ (top axis), on the corresponding parameter of interest, $\mu$. They are calculated from the covariance matrix using the post-fit up (down) uncertainties of the parameter of interest and the nuisance parameter, $\sigma_{\mathrm{POI}}^{\mathrm{up}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NP}}^{\mathrm{up}}$ ($\sigma_{\mathrm{POI}}^{\mathrm{down}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NP}}^{\mathrm{down}}$), and their linear correlation coefficient, $\rho$, following EPJC 84 (2024) 593. The data points and error bars indicate the post-fit values and uncertainties of the nuisance parameters relative to their pre-fit values, $\theta_0$, in units of their pre-fit uncertainties, $\Delta \theta$ (bottom axis). A hollow circle indicates that the nuisance parameter has a Poisson constraint.

Nuisance parameters with a large impact on the fiducial measurement: ranking of the ten most impactful nuisance parameters for the $t\bar{t}+1c$ cross-section measurement. The colored boxes indicate the impact of the nuisance parameters, $\Delta\mu$ (top axis), on the corresponding parameter of interest, $\mu$. They are calculated from the covariance matrix using the post-fit up (down) uncertainties of the parameter of interest and the nuisance parameter, $\sigma_{\mathrm{POI}}^{\mathrm{up}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NP}}^{\mathrm{up}}$ ($\sigma_{\mathrm{POI}}^{\mathrm{down}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NP}}^{\mathrm{down}}$), and their linear correlation coefficient, $\rho$, following EPJC 84 (2024) 593. The data points and error bars indicate the post-fit values and uncertainties of the nuisance parameters relative to their pre-fit values, $\theta_0$, in units of their pre-fit uncertainties, $\Delta \theta$ (bottom axis). A hollow circle indicates that the nuisance parameter has a Poisson constraint.

Nuisance parameters with a large impact on the fiducial measurement: ranking of the ten most impactful nuisance parameters for the $t\bar{t}+{\geq}2c$ ratio to total $t\bar{t}+\text{jets}$ production. The colored boxes indicate the impact of the nuisance parameters, $\Delta\mu$ (top axis), on the corresponding parameter of interest, $\mu$. They are calculated from the covariance matrix using the post-fit up (down) uncertainties of the parameter of interest and the nuisance parameter, $\sigma_{\mathrm{POI}}^{\mathrm{up}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NP}}^{\mathrm{up}}$ ($\sigma_{\mathrm{POI}}^{\mathrm{down}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NP}}^{\mathrm{down}}$), and their linear correlation coefficient, $\rho$, following EPJC 84 (2024) 593. The data points and error bars indicate the post-fit values and uncertainties of the nuisance parameters relative to their pre-fit values, $\theta_0$, in units of their pre-fit uncertainties, $\Delta \theta$ (bottom axis). A hollow circle indicates that the nuisance parameter has a Poisson constraint.

Nuisance parameters with a large impact on the fiducial measurement: ranking of the ten most impactful nuisance parameters for the $t\bar{t}+1c$ ratio to total $t\bar{t}+\text{jets}$ production. The colored boxes indicate the impact of the nuisance parameters, $\Delta\mu$ (top axis), on the corresponding parameter of interest, $\mu$. They are calculated from the covariance matrix using the post-fit up (down) uncertainties of the parameter of interest and the nuisance parameter, $\sigma_{\mathrm{POI}}^{\mathrm{up}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NP}}^{\mathrm{up}}$ ($\sigma_{\mathrm{POI}}^{\mathrm{down}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{NP}}^{\mathrm{down}}$), and their linear correlation coefficient, $\rho$, following EPJC 84 (2024) 593. The data points and error bars indicate the post-fit values and uncertainties of the nuisance parameters relative to their pre-fit values, $\theta_0$, in units of their pre-fit uncertainties, $\Delta \theta$ (bottom axis). A hollow circle indicates that the nuisance parameter has a Poisson constraint.

Efficiencies and rejection rates for the $b$- and $c$-jet tagging working points of the $b/c$-tagger, as well as the selection cuts on the discriminants, $\mathcal{D}_b'$ and $\mathcal{D}_c'$ that define the tagging bins. The primes indicate that a standard logistic function is applied to the discriminants. The b@70% and c@22% working points are inclusive of their respective tighter working points. The values were estimated from single-lepton and dilepton $t\bar{t}$ events simulated with Powheg + Pythia 8.

Efficiencies and rejection rates for the $b$- and $c$-jet tagging working points of the $b/c$-tagger, as well as the selection cuts on the discriminants, $\mathcal{D}_b'$ and $\mathcal{D}_c'$ that define the tagging bins. The primes indicate that a standard logistic function is applied to the discriminants. The b@70% and c@22% working points are inclusive of their respective tighter working points. The values were estimated from single-lepton and dilepton $t\bar{t}$ events simulated with Powheg + Pythia 8.

Pre-fit event yields in the twelve single-lepton and dilepton control regions (CRs) of the analysis. The quoted uncertainties include both statistical and systematic components, but all normalization factors are fixed to their pre-fit values with no uncertainties. All uncertainties are assumed to be uncorrelated. "Other Top" includes single-top-quark production and associated production of $t\bar{t}$ and single top quarks with bosons. "Non-Top" includes W+jets, Z+jets, and diboson processes. The "Fakes" category includes events from misidentified leptons and non-prompt leptons, estimated through the data-driven matrix method in the single-lepton channel and through MC predictions in the dilepton channel.

Pre-fit event yields in the seven signal regions (SRs) of the analysis. The quoted uncertainties include both statistical and systematic components, but all normalization factors are fixed to their pre-fit values with no uncertainties. All uncertainties are assumed to be uncorrelated. "Other Top" includes single-top-quark production and associated production of $t\bar{t}$ and single top quarks with bosons. "Non-Top" includes W+jets, Z+jets, and diboson processes. The "Fakes" category includes events from misidentified leptons and non-prompt leptons, estimated through the data-driven matrix method in the single-lepton channel and through MC predictions in the dilepton channel.

Post-fit event yields in the twelve single-lepton and dilepton control regions (CRs) of the analysis. The quoted uncertainties include both statistical and systematic components, and post-fit correlations between uncertainties are taken into account. "Other Top" includes single-top-quark production and associated production of $t\bar{t}$ and single top quarks with bosons. "Non-Top" includes W+jets, Z+jets, and diboson processes. The "Fakes" category includes events from misidentified leptons and non-prompt leptons, estimated through the data-driven matrix method in the single-lepton channel and through MC predictions in the dilepton channel.

Post-fit event yields in the seven signal regions (SRs) of the analysis. The quoted uncertainties include both statistical and systematic components, and post-fit correlations between uncertainties are taken into account. "Other Top" includes single-top-quark production and associated production of $t\bar{t}$ and single top quarks with bosons. "Non-Top" includes W+jets, Z+jets, and diboson processes. The "Fakes" category includes events from misidentified leptons and non-prompt leptons, estimated through the data-driven matrix method in the single-lepton channel and through MC predictions in the dilepton channel.

Data from Figure 1, panel c, $k_{2}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 1, panel c, $k_{2}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 1, panel d, $k_{3}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 1, panel d, $k_{3}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 2, panel a, $N_{ch}k_{2}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 2, panel a, $N_{ch}k_{2}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 2, panel b, $N^{2}_{ch}k_{3}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 2, panel b, $N^{2}_{ch}k_{3}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 2, panel c, $\Gamma$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 2, panel c, $\Gamma$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 3, panel a, $\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle / \left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle^{5\%}$ vs $N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 3, panel a, $\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle / \left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle^{5\%}$ vs $N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 3, panel b, $k_{2}/k^{5\%}_{2} vs N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 3, panel b, $k_{2}/k^{5\%}_{2} vs N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 3, panel c, $k_{3}/k^{5\%}_{3} vs N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 3, panel c, $k_{3}/k^{5\%}_{3} vs N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 3, panel d, $\Gamma/\Gamma^{5\%}$ vs $N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 3, panel d, $\Gamma/\Gamma^{5\%}$ vs $N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 4, $\Delta p_{T}/\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}/\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 4, $\Delta p_{T}/\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}/\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 4, $\Delta p_{T}/\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}/\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 2 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Figure 4, $\Delta p_{T}/\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}/\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 2 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Second Supplementary Figure, Fig 6, panel a, Correlation between FCal $\Sigma E_{T}$ and $N_{ch}$ in Pb+Pb collisions

Data from Second Supplementary Figure, Fig 6, panel b, Correlation between $[p_{T}]$ - $\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}$/$\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ in Pb+Pb collisions

Data from Third Supplementary Figure, Fig 7, Normalized Event distribution of $N_{ch}$ /$N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions

Data from Third Supplementary Figure, Fig 7, Normalized Event distribution of $N_{ch}$ / $N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions

Data from Fourth Supplementary Figure, Fig 8, panel a, $\gamma$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Fourth Supplementary Figure, Fig 8, panel a, $\gamma$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Fourth Supplementary Figure, Fig 8, panel b, $\gamma/\gamma^{5\%}$ vs $N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Fourth Supplementary Figure, Fig 8, panel b, $\gamma/\gamma^{5\%}$ vs $N_{ch}/N^{5\%}_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Auxiliary Fig 1 panel a, Correlation between FCal $\Sigma E_{T}$ and $N_{ch}$ in Xe+Xe collisions

Data from Auxiliary Fig 1 panel b, Correlation between $[p_{T}]$ - $\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}$/$\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-1\%}$ in Xe+Xe collisions

Data from Auxiliary Fig 2 panel b, $N_{ch}$ /$N^{5\%}_{ch}$ vs Centrality [\%] for Pb+Pb collisions

Data from Auxiliary Fig 2 panel b, $N_{ch}$ /$N^{5\%}_{ch}$ vs Centrality [\%] for Xe+Xe collisions

Data from Auxiliary Fig 3 panel b, $[p_{T}]$ vs $N_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Auxiliary Figure 4, $\Delta p_{T}/\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-0.5\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}/\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-0.5\%}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Auxiliary Figure 4, $\Delta p_{T}/\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-0.5\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}/\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-0.5\%}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 5 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Auxiliary Figure 4, $\Delta p_{T}/\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-0.5\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}/\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-0.5\%}$ for Pb+Pb collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 2 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Data from Auxiliary Figure 4, $\Delta p_{T}/\left\langle[p_{T}]\right\rangle_{0-0.5\%}$ vs $\Delta N_{ch}/\left\langle N_{ch}\right\rangle_{0-0.5\%}$ for Xe+Xe collisions, 0.5 $ <p_{T}< $ 2 GeV/c, $|\eta|< $ 2.5

Invariant mass of the lepton pair plus jet system, for data, background (pre- and post-reweighting) and three $H\rightarrow Za$ signal hypotheses (for $a\rightarrow q\bar{q}/gg$ inclusively). Events are required to pass the complete event selection but not the classification NN requirement. The background normalization is set equal to that of the data for events passing the preselection and being in the $m_{\ell\ell j}$ 100-180 GeV region. The signal normalization assumes the SM Higgs boson inclusive production cross-section, $\mathcal{B}(H\to Za)=100\%$, and it is scaled up by a factor of 100. The error bars (hatched regions) represent the data (MC) sample's statistical uncertainty in the histograms and the ratio plots. Vertical arrows indicate data points that fall outside the displayed $y$-axis range.

Regression NN output variable, for data, reweighted background, and three $H\rightarrow Za$ signal hypotheses ($a\rightarrow q\bar{q}/gg$ inclusively). Events are required to pass the complete event selection, including a $120<m_{\ell\ell j}<140$ GeV requirement, but not the classification NN output variable requirement. The background normalization is set equal to that of the data for events passing the preselection and being in the $m_{\ell\ell j}$ 100-180 GeV region. The signal normalization assumes the SM Higgs boson inclusive production cross-section, $\mathcal{B}(H\to Za)=100\%$, and it is scaled up by a factor of 100. The error bars (hatched regions) represent the data (MC) sample's statistical uncertainty in the histograms and the ratio plots. Vertical arrows indicate data points that fall outside the displayed $y$-axis range.

Classification NN output variable, for data, reweighted background, and three $H\rightarrow Za$ signal hypotheses ($a\rightarrow q\bar{q}/gg$ inclusively). Events are required to pass the complete event selection, including a $120<m_{\ell\ell j}<140$ GeV requirement, but not the classification NN output variable requirement. The background normalization is set equal to that of the data for events passing the preselection and being in the $m_{\ell\ell j}$ 100-180 GeV region. The signal normalization assumes the SM Higgs boson inclusive production cross-section, $\mathcal{B}(H\to Za)=100\%$, and it is scaled up by a factor of 100. The error bars (hatched regions) represent the data (MC) sample's statistical uncertainty in the histograms and the ratio plots. Vertical arrows indicate data points that fall outside the displayed $y$-axis range.

Invariant mass of the lepton pair plus jet system for data, reweighted background, and various signal hypotheses. Events are required to pass the complete event selection (preselection and classification NN requirement). The pre-fit background distribution is shown along with three $H\rightarrow Za$ signal hypotheses coming from the pure MC sample ($a\rightarrow q\bar{q}/gg$ inclusively). The background normalization is set equal to that of the data for events passing the preselection and being in the region 100-180 GeV. The error bars represent the data sample's statistical uncertainty and the grey bands represent the full background model uncertainty before the fit (assuming all the uncertainties are uncorrelated). The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the pre-fit background prediction.

Invariant mass of the lepton pair plus jet system for data, reweighted background, and 2.0 GeV signal hypotheses. Events are required to pass the complete event selection (preselection and classification NN requirement). The background shape and normalization come from the fit to the data. The signal includes only $gg$ decays, its shape comes from the fit, and it is normalized to $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow Za)=100\%$. The error bars represent the data sample's statistical uncertainty and the grey bands represent the full background model uncertainty after the fit. The lower panel shows the per-bin signal significance, $(N_\text{data}-N_\text{MC})\,\text{\Large{/}}\sqrt{\sigma_\text{data}^2+\sigma_\text{MC}^2}$. The post-fit background uncertainty is calculated from a fit under the background-only hypothesis. Vertical arrows indicate data points that fall outside the displayed $y$-axis range.

Observed 95$\%$ CL upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(H \to Za)=100\%$ for $\mathcal{B}(a \to gg)=100\%$, and the expectation under the background-only hypothesis together with its $\pm1\sigma$ and $\pm2\sigma$ intervals. The weaker limits from the previous version of the analysis (PRL 125(2020) 221802) are also shown. Linear interpolation is used to set limits between the mass points for which MC signal samples were generated.

Observed 95$\%$ confidence level upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(H \to Za)=100\%$ for $\mathcal{B}(a\rightarrow q\bar{q})=100\%$, and the expectation under the background-only hypothesis together with its $\pm1\sigma$ and $\pm2\sigma$ intervals. The weaker limits from the previous version of the analysis (PRL 125(2020) 221802) are also shown. Linear interpolation is used to set limits between the mass points for which MC signal samples were generated.

Distributions of the $\mathrm{NN^{SvsB}}$ output for data and the expected background after the likelihood fit in the $SR_{cQu --}$ signal region. The post-fit background expectations are shown as filled histograms, the combined pre-fit background expectations are shown as dashed lines. The signal distribution using the Wilson coefficient values $c_{tu}^{(1)}=0.04$, $c_{Qu}^{(1)}=0.1$, $c_{Qu}^{(8)}=0.1$ is shown with a dotted line, normalized to the same number of events as the background.

Summary of the observed and predicted number of events in the five 2$\ell$ control regions. The background prediction is shown after the combined likelihood fit to data under the signal-plus-background hypothesis across all control regions and signal regions. The uncertainties in the total yields are smaller than the sum in quadrature of the uncertainties in the individual contributions due to anti-correlations resulting from the likelihood fit. Int Conv refers to events with photon conversions in the inner detector, while Mat Conv refers to events with photon conversions in the detector material. QMisID refers to events with charge-misidentified lepton.

Summary of the observed and predicted number of events in the four 3$\ell$ control regions. The background prediction is shown after the combined likelihood fit to data under the signal-plus-background hypothesis across all control regions and signal regions. The uncertainties in the total yields are smaller than the sum in quadrature of the uncertainties in the individual contributions due to anti-correlations resulting from the likelihood fit. Int Conv refers to events with photon conversions in the inner detector, while Mat Conv refers to events with photon conversions in the detector material. QMisID refers to events with charge-misidentified lepton.

Comparison of the observed limits on the three WCs to the limit obtained by the ATLAS Run~1 analysis of events with $b$-tagged jets and a same-sign lepton pair [JHEP10(2015)150]. The cross-section limits from that analysis are converted to the limits on the WCs by using the fitted EFT parametrization. The bounds on the WCs are shown at the 68$\%$ CL (solid) and/or 95$\%$ CL (dashed) levels. For the ATLAS Run~1 analysis only the bounds at 95$\%$ CL are available. The vertical bar represents the SM prediction. The new-physics scale is set to $\Lambda = 1 \, \text{TeV}$.

Observed lower limits at 95$\%$ confidence level on the scale of new physics $\Lambda$ for Wilson coefficient values of 0.01, 1 and $4\pi^2$. The limits are compared with the limits obtained by the ATLAS Run~1 analysis of events with $b$-tagged jets and a same-sign lepton pair.

2D likelihood scans of the Wilson coefficients $c_{tu}^{(1)}$ versus $c_{Qu}^{(1)}$. The new-physics scale is set to $\Lambda = 1 \, \text{TeV}$. In the table the $2\Delta$NLL values are shown which correspond to the minimized negative log likelihood for a given Wilson coefficient pair.

2D likelihood scans of the Wilson coefficients $c_{tu}^{(1)}$ versus $c_{Qu}^{(8)}$. The new-physics scale is set to $\Lambda = 1 \, \text{TeV}$. In the table the $2\Delta$NLL values are shown which correspond to the minimized negative log likelihood for a given Wilson coefficient pair.

2D likelihood scans of the Wilson coefficients $c_{Qu}^{(1)}$ versus $c_{Qu}^{(8)}$. The new-physics scale is set to $\Lambda = 1 \, \text{TeV}$. In the table the $2\Delta$NLL values are shown which correspond to the minimized negative log likelihood for a given Wilson coefficient pair.

1D-likelihood scan for $c_{tu}^{(1)}$. The observed and expected limits at 68\% and 95\% confidence level (CL) can be read off by finding the intersection of the likelihood scan curve with the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ lines. The new-physics scale is set to $\Lambda = 1 \, \text{TeV}$. In the table the $2\Delta$NLL values are shown which correspond to the minimized negative log likelihood for a given Wilson coefficient value.

1D-likelihood scan for $c_{Qu}^{(1)}$. The observed and expected limits at 68\% and 95\% confidence level (CL) can be read off by finding the intersection of the likelihood scan curve with the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ lines. The new-physics scale is set to $\Lambda = 1 \, \text{TeV}$. In the table the $2\Delta$NLL values are shown which correspond to the minimized negative log likelihood for a given Wilson coefficient value.

1D-likelihood scan for $c_{Qu}^{(8)}$. The observed and expected limits at 68\% and 95\% confidence level (CL) can be read off by finding the intersection of the likelihood scan curve with the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ lines. The new-physics scale is set to $\Lambda = 1 \, \text{TeV}$. In the table the $2\Delta$NLL values are shown which correspond to the minimized negative log likelihood for a given Wilson coefficient value.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ for the combined fit, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ for the combined fit, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ for the combined fit, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the ($\kappa_{\lambda}$, $\kappa_{2V}$) parameter space, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood expected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) and 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the ($\kappa_{\lambda}$, $\kappa_{2V}$) parameter space, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions. In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

Likelihood contours at 68% (solid line) and 95% (dashed line) CL in the ($c_{hhh}$, $c_{gghh}$) parameter space, when all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The corresponding expected contours are shown by the inner and outer shaded regions. The SM prediction is indicated by the star, while the observed best-fit value is denoted by the black cross. The best-fit value corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood contours at 68% (solid line) and 95% (dashed line) CL in the ($c_{hhh}$, $c_{gghh}$) parameter space, when all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The corresponding expected contours are shown by the inner and outer shaded regions. The SM prediction is indicated by the star, while the observed best-fit value is denoted by the black cross.

Likelihood contours at 68% (solid line) and 95% (dashed line) CL in the ($c_{hhh}$, $c_{tthh}$) parameter space, when all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The corresponding expected contours are shown by the inner and outer shaded regions. The SM prediction is indicated by the star, while the observed best-fit value is denoted by the black cross. The best-fit value corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood contours at 68% (solid line) and 95% (dashed line) CL in the ($c_{hhh}$, $c_{tthh}$) parameter space, when all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The corresponding expected contours are shown by the inner and outer shaded regions. The SM prediction is indicated by the star, while the observed best-fit value is denoted by the black cross.

Likelihood contours at 68% (solid line) and 95% (dashed line) CL in the ($c_{H}$, $c_{H◻}$) parameter space, when all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The corresponding expected contours are shown by the inner and outer shaded regions. The SM prediction is indicated by the star, while the observed best-fit value is denoted by the black cross. The best-fit value corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood contours at 68% (solid line) and 95% (dashed line) CL in the ($c_{H}$, $c_{H◻}$) parameter space, when all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The corresponding expected contours are shown by the inner and outer shaded regions. The SM prediction is indicated by the star, while the observed best-fit value is denoted by the black cross.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal ggF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting ggF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal ggF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ SLT channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting ggF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal ggF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ LTT channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting ggF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting VBF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ SLT channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting VBF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ LTT channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting VBF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{2V}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting VBF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{2V}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ SLT channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting VBF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

The acceptance times efficiency [in %] for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{2V}$ in each analysis category for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ LTT channel. The other coupling modifiers affecting VBF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ for the fit to the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ for the fit to the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ for the fit to the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ for the fit to the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ for the fit to the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ for the fit to the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ for the fit to the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ for the fit to the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ channel, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Summary of the expected (blue) and observed (orange) one-dimensional constraints at 68% (solid error bars) and 95% (dashed error bars) CL on the coefficients of selected HEFT (top) and SMEFT (bottom) operators describing Higgs boson interactions affecting $HH$ production through gluon-gluon fusion. The results are obtained from one dimensional scans of the profile log-likelihood assuming that all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The contribution from VBF $HH$ production is neglected.

Figure 8(left) of the article. Differential fiducial cross-section of the Z boson $p_T$ in events with $Z (\rightarrow ll) \ge 1 $ b-jets. The thin inner band corresponds to the statistical uncertainty of the data, and the outer band to statistical and systematic uncertainties of the data, added in quadrature.

Figure 8(right) of the article. Differential fiducial cross-section of the leading $b$-jet $p_T$ in events with $Z (\rightarrow ll) \ge 1 $ b-jets. The thin inner band corresponds to the statistical uncertainty of the data, and the outer band to statistical and systematic uncertainties of the data, added in quadrature.

Figure 9 of the article. Differential fiducial cross-section of the $\Delta R$ between the $Z$ boson and the leading $b$-jet in events with $Z (\rightarrow ll) \ge 1 $ b-jets. The thin inner band corresponds to the statistical uncertainty of the data, and the outer band to statistical and systematic uncertainties of the data, added in quadrature.

Figure 10(left) of the article. Differential fiducial cross-section of the $\Delta \phi$ between the leading and sub-leading $b$-jets in events with $Z (\rightarrow ll) \ge 2 $ b-jets. The thin inner band corresponds to the statistical uncertainty of the data, and the outer band to statistical and systematic uncertainties of the data, added in quadrature.

Figure 10(right) of the article. Differential fiducial cross-section of the invariant mass of the leading and sub-leading $b$-jets in events with $Z (\rightarrow ll) \ge 2 $ b-jets. The thin inner band corresponds to the statistical uncertainty of the data, and the outer band to statistical and systematic uncertainties of the data, added in quadrature.

Figure 11(left) of the article. Differential fiducial cross-section of the Z boson $p_T$ in events with $Z (\rightarrow ll) \ge 1 $ c-jets. The thin inner band corresponds to the statistical uncertainty of the data, and the outer band to statistical and systematic uncertainties of the data, added in quadrature.

Figure 11(right) of the article. Differential fiducial cross-section of the leading $c$-jet $p_T$ in events with $Z (\rightarrow ll) \ge 1 $ c-jets. The thin inner band corresponds to the statistical uncertainty of the data, and the outer band to statistical and systematic uncertainties of the data, added in quadrature.

Figure 12 of the article. Differential fiducial cross-section of the leading $c$-jet $x_F$ in events with $Z (\rightarrow ll) \ge 1 $ c-jets. The thin inner band corresponds to the statistical uncertainty of the data, and the outer band to statistical and systematic uncertainties of the data, added in quadrature.