Event yields for a simulated $ZH(\rightarrow aa\rightarrow (b\bar{b})(b\bar{b}))$ sample with $m_a = 17.5\,\text{GeV}$. The signal sample is produced with cross section equals to the standard model $pp\to ZH$, i.e. $0.88\,\text{pb}$. Cut 0 corresponds to the initial number of events. Cut 1 requires the single lepton trigger. Cut 2 requires 2 identified leptons. Cut 3 requires the Z-boson mass window. Cut 4 requires 2 reconstructed $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates. Cut 5a requires 2 identified $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 1HPC1LPC region. Cut 6a requires the 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 1HPC1LPC region to be inside the Higgs mass window. Cut 5b requires 2 identified $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 2HPC region. Cut 6b requires the 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 2HPC region to be inside the Higgs mass window.

Background yield table for Z+jets, $t\bar{t}$, and rare sources. Observed data yield. Signal $ZH(\rightarrow aa\rightarrow (b\bar{b})(b\bar{b}))$ yield with $m_a = 20\,\text{GeV}$. The signal sample is produced with cross section equals to the standard model $pp\to ZH$, i.e. $0.88\,\text{pb}$. The table includes the yields in two signal regions with leptons consistent with an on-shell Z-boson decay, one with 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 2HPC region and one with 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 1HPC1LPC region. The table also includes the yields in four control regions, one with leptons consistent with an on-shell Z-boson decay and 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the Low Purity Category (LPC), and three others where the leptons are not consistent an on-shell Z-boson decay.

Differential fiducial cross section of the Z boson $|y|$ in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+1$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the leading b-jet $|y|$ in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+1$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $\Delta \phi$ between Z boson and leading $b$-jet in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+1$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $\Delta y$ between Z boson and leading $b$-jet in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+1$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $\Delta R$ between Z boson and leading $b$-jet in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+1$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $\Delta \phi$ between the first two leading $b$-jets in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+2$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $\Delta y$ between the first two leading $b$-jets in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+2$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $\Delta R$ between the first two leading $b$-jets in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+2$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the invariant mass of the first two leading $b$-jets in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+2$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the Z boson $p_{\text{T}}$ in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+2$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $p_{\text{T}}$ of the first two leading $b$-jets in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+2$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

Differential fiducial cross section of the ratio between the $p_{\text{T}}$ and the invariant mass of the first two leading $b$-jets in events with $Z(\rightarrow ll)\ge+2$ b-jets. The statistical uncertainties and the individual components of systematic uncertainty are given in each bin. Statistical uncertainties are bin-to-bin uncorrelated.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 25$.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 25$.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 55$.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 55$.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 55$.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 55$.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 55$.

The $E_T^{miss}$ model predicted trigger rate as a function of $\mu$ for the cell $E_T^{miss}$ algorithm with a threshold of $80\,$GeV and $120\,$GeV, assuming no additional pile-up mitigation.

The L1 $E_T^{miss}$ trigger efficiency, shown as a function of $p_T(\mu\mu)$ in $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events.

The efficiencies in the plot are shown for events satisfying a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection and with $p_T(\mu\mu)$ larger than $150\,$GeV vs pile-up for each of the four years of data taking.

The L1 $E_T^{miss}$ trigger rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for runs in three different periods ($\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$) in the year 2017.

The L1 $E_T^{miss}$ trigger rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for runs in three different periods ($\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$) in the year 2017.

The L1 $E_T^{miss}$ trigger rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for runs in three different periods ($\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$) in the year 2017.

The L1 $E_T^{miss}$ trigger efficiency is shown as a function of mean pile-up for events satisfying a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection and with $p_T(\mu\mu)$ larger than $150\,$GeV in three periods during the year 2017.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $30\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 40$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $30\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 40$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $30\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 40$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $30\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 40$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $30\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 40$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Turn-on efficiency curves are shown for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events for three algorithms: the cell algorithm alone, the pufit algorithm alone and the combined cell+pufit algorithm. The thresholds are set such that the algorithms have equal rates, and the data were recorded in the year 2018. Here the trigger efficiency is shown with respect to $p_T(\mu\mu)$.

Turn-on efficiency curves are shown for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events for three algorithms: the cell algorithm alone, the pufit algorithm alone and the combined cell+pufit algorithm. The thresholds are set such that the algorithms have equal rates, and the data were recorded in the year 2018. Here the trigger efficiency is shown with respect to the offline $E_T^{miss}$ calculation with muons treated as being invisible.

Efficiencies for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events are shown for the L1 $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV trigger and for the complete L1+HLT trigger chain that also requires pufit > 110 GeV. Each is shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for a $p_T(\mu\mu)$ threshold of 150 GeV.

Efficiencies for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events are shown for the L1 $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV trigger and for the complete L1+HLT trigger chain that also requires pufit > 110 GeV. Each is shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for an offline $E_T^{miss}$ threshold of 150 GeV.

Efficiencies for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events are shown for the L1 $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV trigger and for the complete L1+HLT trigger chain that also requires pufit > 110 GeV. Each is shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for an $p_T(\mu\mu)$ threshold of 175 GeV.

Efficiencies for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events are shown for the L1 $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV trigger and for the complete L1+HLT trigger chain that also requires pufit > 110 GeV. Each is shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for an offline $E_T^{miss}$ threshold of 175 GeV.

HLT_xe70_mht trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2015.

HLT_xe90_mht trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2016.

HLT_xe110_mht trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2016.

HLT_xe110_pufit trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2017. This trigger included an implicit requirement of cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV.

HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65 trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2018.

HLT_xe110_pufit_xe70 trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2018.

Full-chain trigger efficiencies for each year as a function of $p_T(\mu\mu)$. The efficiency corresponds to that of the lowest unprescaled trigger that is adjusted throughout each year.

Full-chain trigger efficiencies for 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $p_T(\mu\mu)>150$ GeV. The efficiency corresponds to that of the lowest unprescaled trigger that is adjusted throughout the year.

Efficiencies for the first-level trigger L1XE50 and the combined L1+HLT trigger chain HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65_L1XE50 in data recorded in the year 2018 are shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $W\rightarrow e\nu$ and $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selections with offline $E_T^{miss}>150\,$GeV.

Efficiencies for the first-level trigger L1XE50 and the combined L1+HLT trigger chain HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65_L1XE50 in data recorded in the year 2018 are shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $t\bar t$ with offline $E_T^{miss}>150\,$GeV.

Efficiencies for the first-level trigger L1XE50 and the combined L1+HLT trigger chain HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65_L1XE50 in data recorded in the year 2018 are shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $W\rightarrow e\nu$ and $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selections with offline $E_T^{miss}>175\,$GeV.

Efficiencies for the first-level trigger L1XE50 and the combined L1+HLT trigger chain HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65_L1XE50 in data recorded in the year 2018 are shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $t\bar t$ with offline $E_T^{miss}>175\,$GeV.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-tag category of the 2tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 400, 1000 and 1500 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 6, 12 and 25 respectively in the mh125 scenario are also provided. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 1000 and 1500 GeV is scaled by 100 in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the gluon-gluon fusion Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the Higgs boson mass.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the b-associated Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the boson mass.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. No theoretical uncertainty is considered when computing these limits.

Acceptance times efficiency for a scalar boson produced by gluon-gluon fusion as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Acceptance times efficiency for a scalar boson produced by b-associated production as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the scalar boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the scalar boson mass and the fraction of the b-associated production. The limits are calculated from a statistical combination of the 1l1tau_h and 2tau_h channels.

Expected 95% CL upper limits on the scalar boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the scalar boson mass and the fraction of the b-associated production. The limits are calculated from a statistical combination of the 1l1tau_h and 2tau_h channels.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 200 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 250 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 300 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 350 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 400 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 600 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 700 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 800 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1000 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1200 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 2000 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Observed two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 2500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 200 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 250 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 300 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 350 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 400 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 600 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 700 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 800 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1000 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1200 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 2000 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 2500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\chi})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(\widetilde{\tau})$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The observed 95% CL upper limits with one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 1.0. The highest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 20.0. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 1.0. The highest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 20.0. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 1.0. The highest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 20.0. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 1.0. The highest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 20.0. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 1.0. The highest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 20.0. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 1.0. The highest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the $M_{h}^{125}(alignment)$ scenario is 20.0. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The theoretical uncertainty of signal cross section is considered.

The best-fit expected and observed distributions of the combined NN output in the VRSS for the $e\tau$ channel for events with 3-prong $\tau_\text{had-vis}$ candidates. The last bin in each plot includes overflow events.

The best-fit expected and observed distributions of the combined NN output in the SR for the $e\tau$ channel for events with 1-prong $\tau_\text{had-vis}$ candidates. The last bin in each plot includes overflow events.

The best-fit expected and observed distributions of the combined NN output in the SR for the $e\tau$ channel for events with 3-prong $\tau_\text{had-vis}$ candidates. The last bin in each plot includes overflow events.

The best-fit expected and observed distributions of the combined NN output in the SR for the $\mu\tau$ channel for events with 1-prong $\tau_\text{had-vis}$ candidates. The last bin in each plot includes overflow events.

The best-fit expected and observed distributions of the combined NN output in the SR for the $\mu\tau$ channel for events with 3-prong $\tau_\text{had-vis}$ candidates. The last bin in each plot includes overflow events.

Observed and expected upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(Z\rightarrow\ell\tau)$ at 95% confidence level.

$\langle \zeta \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, forward jet.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle r \rangle$, forward jet.

$\langle r \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle n_{ch} \rangle$, both jets.

$\langle \zeta \rangle$, combined jet.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, both jets.

$\langle r \rangle$, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average number of tracks per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average fragmentation function per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average relative $p_T$ per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average r per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the number of tracks. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the fragmentation function. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the relative $p_T$. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the r. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-section of narrow resonance $X$ to $HH$ as a function of the mass $m_{X}$.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-section of broad resonance $X$ to $HH$ as a function of the mass $m_{X}$.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-sections of non-resonant $HH$ production via VBF as a function of the di-vector-boson-di-Higgs-boson coupling modifier $\kappa_{2V}$. The theory prediction of the cross-section as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ is also shown. The minimum theory cross-section is 1.37 fb at $\kappa_{2V}=1.17$.

The ratios (&mu;) of the 95&#37; C.L. upper limits on the combined s&rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723; and s&rarr; ZZ cross section to simplified model expectations for the m_Z'=1 TeV scenario, for various m_s hypotheses. The observed limits (solid line) are consistent with the expectation under the SM-only hypothesis (dashed line) within uncertainties (filled band), except for a small excess for m_s=160 GeV, discussed in the text.

The ratios (&mu;) of the 95&#37; C.L. upper limits on the combined s&rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723; and s&rarr; ZZ cross section to simplified model expectations for the m_Z'=1.7 TeV scenario, for various m_s hypotheses. The observed limits (solid line) are consistent with the expectation under the SM-only hypothesis (dashed line) within uncertainties (filled band), except for a small excess for m_s=160 GeV, discussed in the text.

Observed upper limits at 95&#37; C.L. on &sigma;(pp &rarr; s &chi;&chi;) × B(s&rarr; VV) for m_Z'=0.5 TeV signal points. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the &sigma;(pp &rarr; s &chi;&chi;) × B(s&rarr; VV) process for m_Z'=0.5 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Observed upper limits at 95&#37; C.L. on &sigma;(pp &rarr; s &chi;&chi;) × B(s&rarr; VV) for m_Z'=1 TeV signal points. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the &sigma;(pp &rarr; s &chi;&chi;) × B(s&rarr; VV) process for m_Z'=1 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Observed upper limits at 95&#37; C.L. on &sigma;(pp &rarr; s &chi;&chi;) × B(s&rarr; VV) for m_Z'=1.7 TeV signal points. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the &sigma;(pp &rarr; s &chi;&chi;) × B(s&rarr; VV) process for m_Z'=1.7 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

SM background post-fit yields stacked in each SR and CR category and E_T^miss bin and data overlaid with the maximum likelihood estimators set to the conditional values of the combined signal and control region fit. The hatched uncertainty band shown includes simulation statistics uncertainties, experimental systematic uncertainties, and V+jets theory modelling systematic uncertainties. Pre-fit uncertainties cover differences between the data and pre-fit background prediction.

Cumulative efficiencies for the merged category for signal samples with m_s=160 GeV (a), m_s=235 GeV (b) and m_s=310 GeV (c), each with m_Z'=1 TeV. The dark Higgs candidate selection includes stringent jet substructure requirements and typically at most one candidate is present in signal events. Here, &Delta; &phi;_{jets_1,2,3 E_T^miss} is the smallest azimuthal angle between the E_T^miss and any of the three highest-p_T (leading) small-R jets.

Cumulative efficiencies for the intermediate category for signal samples with m_s=160 GeV (a), m_s=235 GeV (b) and m_s=310 GeV (c), each with m_Z'=1 TeV. The TAR+Comb algorithm reconstructs the dark Higgs candidate from a TAR jet with m^TAR&gt;60 GeV that is supplemented by up to two additional small-R jets within &Delta;R_cone=2.5 of the TAR jet. Here, &Delta; &phi;_{jets_1,2,3 E_T^miss} is the smallest azimuthal angle between the E_T^miss and any of the three highest-p_T (leading) small-R jets. For details see text.

The product of acceptance and efficiency (A &times; &varepsilon;), defined as the number of signal events satisfying the full set of selection criteria in the merged or intermediate signal regions, divided by the total number of generated signal events, for the s(W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) dark Higgs signal points with dark Higgs boson mass m_s and Z' boson mass m_Z'.

The product of acceptance and efficiency (A &times; &varepsilon;), defined as the number of signal events satisfying the full set of selection criteria in the merged or intermediate signal regions, divided by the total number of generated signal events, for the s(ZZ) dark Higgs signal points with dark Higgs boson mass m_s and Z' boson mass m_Z'.

Data from Fig 6d. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 6e. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 6f. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 7a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 7b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 7c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 7d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 7e. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 7f. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 8a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 8b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 8c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 8d. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 8e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 8f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 14a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 14b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 4b. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 21b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 5a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 5b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 14c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 14d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 4c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 4d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 5c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 5d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 14e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 14f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 4e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 4f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 5e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 5f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 14a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 14b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 4a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 4b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 5a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 5b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 14c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 14d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 4c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 4d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 5c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 5d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 14e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 14f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 4e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 4f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 5e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 5f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 36-40a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 81-85a. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 36-40b. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 81-85b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 36-40c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 81-85c. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 51-55a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 101-105a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 51-55b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 101-105b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 51-55c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 101-105c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 66-70a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 106-110a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 66-70b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 106-110b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 66-70c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 106-110c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 26-30a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 71-75a. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 26-30b. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 71-75b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 26-30c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 71-75c. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 41-45a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 86-90a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 41-45b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 86-90b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 41-45c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 86-90c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 56-60a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 101-105a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 56-60b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 101-105b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 56-60c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 101-105c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 31-35a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 76-80a. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 31-35b. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 76-80b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 31-35c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 76-80c. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 46-50a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 91-95a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 46-50b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 91-95b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 46-50c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 91-95c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from Fig 61-65a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 106-110a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 61-65b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 106-110b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 61-65c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from Fig 106-110c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 6a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 15a. Theextracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 6b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 15b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 6c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 15c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 7a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 16a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 7b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 16b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 7c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 16c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 8a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 17a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 8b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 17b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 8c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 17c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 6a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 15a. Theextracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 6b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 15b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 6c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 15c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 7a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 16a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 7b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 16b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 7c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 16c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 8a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 17a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 8b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 17b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 8c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from Fig 17c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 99a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 100a. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 99b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 100b. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 99c. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 100c. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 101a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 102a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 101b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 102b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 101c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 102c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 103a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 104a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 103b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 104b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 103c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 104c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 105a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 106a. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 105b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 106b. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 105c. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 106c. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 107a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 108a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 107b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 108b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 107c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 108c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 109a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 110a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 109b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 110b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 109c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 110c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 111a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 112a. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 111b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 112b. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 111c. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 112c. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 113a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 114a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 113b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 114b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 113c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 114c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 115a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 116a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 115b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 116b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 115c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 116c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.

Data from FigAux 99d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 100d. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 99e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 100e. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 99f. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 100f. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 101d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 102d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 101e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 102e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 101f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 102f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 103d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 104d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 103e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 104e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 103f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 104f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 105d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 106d. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 105e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 106e. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 105f. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 106f. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 107d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 108d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 107e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 108e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 107f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 108f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 109d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 110d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 109e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 110e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 109f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 110f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 111d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 112d. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 111e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from FigAux 112e. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 111f. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 112f. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 113d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 114d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 113e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 114e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 113f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 114f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.

Data from FigAux 115d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 116d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 115e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 116e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 115f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).

Data from FigAux 116f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).