The values of $\Delta \langle p^{2}_{\rm T}\rangle$ as a function of centrality at backward ($-4.46 < y_{\rm cms} < -2.96$) and forward ($2.03 < y_{\rm cms} < 3.53$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second and third ones are the systematic uncertainties. The third is related to the uncertainty on the $\langle p^{2}_{\rm T} \rangle$ in pp collisions and is correlated over centrality.

The nuclear modification factor ($Q_{\rm pPb}$) of inclusive J/$\psi$ as function of $\langle N_{\rm coll} \rangle$ at backward ($-4.46 < y_{\rm cms} < -2.96$) and forward ($2.03 < y_{\rm cms} < 3.53$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second and third ones are the systematic uncertainties. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over centrality.

The $p_{\rm T}$-differential inclusive J/$\psi$ $Q_{\rm pPb}$ for six centrality classes at backward ($-4.46 < y_{\rm cms} < -2.96$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second one and the third ones are the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties, respectively. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over $p_{\rm T}$. The fourth uncertainty is the correlated systematic which is common for all centrality classes. In Figure 7 correlated systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature.

The $p_{\rm T}$-differential inclusive J/$\psi$ $Q_{\rm pPb}$ for six centrality classes at forward ($2.03 < y_{\rm cms} < 3.53$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second one and the third ones are the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties, respectively. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over $p_{\rm T}$. The fourth uncertainty is the correlated systematic which is common for all centrality classes. In Figure 8 correlated systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature.

The ratio of inclusive J/$\psi$ $Q_{\rm pPb}$ between peripheral to central collisions ($Q_{\rm PC}$) as function of $p_{\rm T}$ for six centrality classes at backward ($-4.46 < y_{\rm cms} < -2.96$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second one and the third ones are the systematic uncertainties. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over $p_{\rm T}$.

The ratio of inclusive J/$\psi$ $Q_{\rm pPb}$ between peripheral to central collisions ($Q_{\rm PC}$) as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ for six centrality classes at forward ($2.03 < y_{\rm cms} < 3.53$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second and the third ones are the systematic uncertainties. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over $p_{\rm T}$.

B.R.$_{\psi(\rm 2S)\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-}}{\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}}$/B.R.$_{J/\psi\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-}}{\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}}$ as a function of $\langle N_{\rm coll} \rangle$ at backward ($-4.46 < y_{\rm cms} < -2.96$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second and the third ones are the systematic uncertainties. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over centrality.

B.R.$_{\psi(\rm 2S)\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-}}{\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}}$/B.R.$_{J/\psi\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-}}{\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}}$ as a function of $\langle N_{\rm coll} \rangle$ at forward ($2.03 < y_{\rm cms} < 3.53$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second and the third ones are the systematic uncertainties. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over centrality.

Double ratio $[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pPb}/[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pp}$ as a function of $\langle N_{\rm coll} \rangle$ at backward ($-4.46 < y_{\rm cms} < -2.96$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second and the third ones are the systematic uncertainties. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over centrality.

Double ratio $[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pPb}/[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pp}$ as a function of $\langle N_{\rm coll} \rangle$ at forward ($2.03 < y_{\rm cms} < 3.53$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second and the third ones are the systematic uncertainties. The third uncertainty is fully correlated over centrality.

Inclusive $\psi$(2S) $Q_{\rm pPb}$ as a function of $\langle N_{\rm coll} \rangle$ at backward ($-4.46 < y_{\rm cms} < -2.96$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, the third is the correlated systematic for $\psi$(2S) or J/$\psi$ only while the fourth one is the correlated systematic shared among $\psi$(2S) and J/$\psi$.

Inclusive $\psi$(2S) $Q_{\rm pPb}$ as a function of $\langle N_{\rm coll} \rangle$ at forward ($2.03 < y_{\rm cms} < 3.53$) centre-of-mass rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, the third is the correlated systematic for $\psi$(2S) or J/$\psi$ only while the fourth one is the correlated systematic shared among $\psi$(2S) and J/$\psi$.

Inclusive J/$\psi$ cross sections extrapolated from existing measurements at backward ($-4.46 < y < -2.96$) and forward ($2.03 < y < 3.53$) rapidity in pp collisions. The first and the second uncertainties are the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties, respectively. The correlated uncertainty is correlated over rapidity. This table refers to Fig. 1 of ALICE-PUBLIC-2020-007.

Inclusive $\psi$(2S) cross sections extrapolated from existing measurements at backward ($-4.46 < y < -2.96$) and forward ($2.03 < y < 3.53$) rapidity in pp collisions . The first and the second uncertainties are the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties, respectively. The correlated uncertainty is fully correlated over rapidity. This table refers Fig. 1 of ALICE-PUBLIC-2020-007.

The rapidity differential inclusive J/$\psi$ cross sections extrapolated from existing measurements for backward ($-4.46 < y < -2.96$) rapidity interval in pp collisions. The first and the second uncertainties are the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties, respectively. The correlated uncertainty is correlated over rapidity. This table refers Fig. 2 of ALICE-PUBLIC-2020-007.

The rapidity differential inclusive J/$\psi$ cross sections extrapolated from existing measurements for forward ($2.03 < y < 3.53$) rapidity interval in pp collisions. The first and the second uncertainties are the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties, respectively. The correlated uncertainty is correlated over rapidity. This table refers Fig. 2 of ALICE-PUBLIC-2020-007.

The $p_{\rm T}$-differential inclusive J/$\psi$ cross sections extrapolated from existing measurements at backward ($-4.46 < y < -2.96$) rapidity in pp collisions. The first and the second uncertainties are the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties, respectively. The correlated uncertainty is fully correlated over $p_{\rm T}$. This table refers Fig. 3 of ALICE-PUBLIC-2020-007.

The $p_{\rm T}$-differential inclusive J/$\psi$ cross sections extrapolated from existing measurements at forward ($2.03 < y < 3.53$) rapidity in pp collisions. The first and the second uncertainties are the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties, respectively. The correlated uncertainty is fully correlated over $p_{\rm T}$. This table refers Fig. 3 of ALICE-PUBLIC-2020-007.

The values of $\langle p_{\rm T} \rangle$ and $\langle p^{2}_{\rm T} \rangle$ of inclusive J/$\psi$ at backward ($-4.46 < y < -2.96$) and forward ($2.03 < y < 3.53$) rapidity calculated from extrapolated cross sections in pp collisions. The uncertainty is the systematic uncertainty. The systematic uncertainty is obtained as the quadratic sum of the uncorrelated and correlated systematic uncertainties. This table refers Fig. 4 of ALICE-PUBLIC-2020-007.

Rapidity differential fiducial $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ in Pb-Pb

Centrality differential fiducial invariant yield in Pb-Pb

Transverse momentum spectrum of $K^{*0} + \overline{K^{*0}}$ measured at midrapidity ($|y|<0.5$) in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $\pm2.6\%$ is excluded.

Transverse momentum spectrum of $\phi$ measured at midrapidity ($|y|<0.5$) in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $\pm2.6\%$ is excluded.

Transverse momentum spectrum of $p + \overline{p}$ measured at midrapidity ($|y|<0.5$) in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $\pm2.6\%$ is excluded.

Transverse momentum spectrum of $\Lambda + \overline{\Lambda}$ measured at midrapidity ($|y|<0.5$) in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $\pm2.6\%$ is excluded.

Transverse momentum spectrum of $\Xi^{-} + \overline{\Xi}^{+}$ measured at midrapidity ($|y|<0.5$) in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $\pm2.6\%$ is excluded.

Transverse momentum spectrum of $\Omega^{-} + \overline{\Omega}^{+}$ measured at midrapidity ($|y|<0.5$) in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $\pm2.6\%$ is excluded.

Transverse momentum spectrum of $K^{0}_{S}$ measured at midrapidity ($|y|<0.5$) in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+7.3}_{-3.5}\%$ is excluded.

Transverse momentum spectrum of $\Lambda + \overline{\Lambda}$ measured at midrapidity ($|y|<0.5$) in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+7.3}_{-3.5}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $\pi^{+} + \pi^{-}$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $K^{+} + K^{-}$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $K^{0}_{S}$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $K^{*0} + \overline{K^{*0}}$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $\phi$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $p + \overline{p}$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $\Lambda + \overline{\Lambda}$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $\Xi^{-} + \overline{\Xi}^{+}$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

Ratios of the transverse-momentum spectra of $\Omega^{-} + \overline{\Omega}^{+}$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV to those for $\sqrt{s}={7}$ TeV. The normalization uncertainty of $^{+10.8}_{-6.3}\%$ is excluded.

$(K^{+} + K^{-})/(\pi^{+}+\pi^{-})$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV.

$(K^{*0} + \overline{K^{*0}})/(\pi^{+}+\pi^{-})$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV.

$K^{0}_{S}/(\pi^{+}+\pi^{-})$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV.

$\phi/(\pi^{+}+\pi^{-})$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV.

$\phi/(\pi^{+}+\pi^{-})$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV.

Average transverse momentum of $\pi^{+}+\pi^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Average transverse momentum of $K^{+} + K^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Average transverse momentum of $K^{0}_{S}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Average transverse momentum of $K^{*0} + \overline{K^{*0}}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Average transverse momentum of $\phi$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Average transverse momentum of $p + \overline{p}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Average transverse momentum of $\Lambda+\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Average transverse momentum of $\Xi^{-} + \overline{\Xi}^{+}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Average transverse momentum of $\Omega^{-} + \overline{\Omega}^{+}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $K^{+} + K^{-}$ to $\pi^{+} + \pi^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $p + \overline{p}$ to $\pi^{+} + \pi^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Lambda+\overline{\Lambda}$ to $\pi^{+} + \pi^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Xi^{-} + \overline{\Xi}^{+}$ to $\pi^{+} + \pi^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Omega^{-} + \overline{\Omega}^{+}$ to $\pi^{+} + \pi^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\phi$ to $K^{+} + K^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $K^{*0} + \overline{K^{*0}}$ to $K^{+} + K^{-}$ as a function of the center-of-mass energy.

$(p + \overline{p})$/($\pi^{+}+\pi^{-}$) particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV.

$(\Lambda + \overline{\Lambda})/K^{0}_{S}$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV.

$(\Omega^{-} + \overline{\Omega}^{+})/\phi$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV.

$(\Xi^{-} + \overline{\Xi}^{+})/\phi$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV.

$(\Omega^{-} + \overline{\Omega}^{+})/\phi$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV.

$(\Xi^{-} + \overline{\Xi}^{+})/\phi$ particle ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of inclusive J/psi as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density at backward rapidity -4.46 < y_cms < -2.96 (Pb-going direction).

Relative mean transverse momentum of inclusive J/psi as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density at forward rapidity 2.03 < y_cms < 3.53 (p-going direction).

Mean transverse momentum of inclusive J/psi as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density at backward rapidity -4.46 < y_cms < -2.96 (Pb-going direction).

Ratio of inclusive $\psi(2{\rm S})$ over J/$\psi$ yields times their branching ratios as a function of $y_{\rm cms}$ in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV .The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Ratio of inclusive $\psi(2{\rm S})$ over J/$\psi$ yields times their branching ratios as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV at forward rapidity.The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Ratio of inclusive $\psi(2{\rm S})$ over J/$\psi$ yields times their branching ratios as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV at backward rapidity.The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Inclusive $\psi(2{\rm S})$ $R_{\rm pPb}$ values as a function of $y_{\rm {cms}}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

Inclusive $\psi(2{\rm S})$ $R_{\rm pPb}$ values as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV at forward rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

Inclusive $\psi(2{\rm S})$ $R_{\rm pPb}$ values as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV at backward rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

Double ratio of $\psi$(2S) and J/$\psi$ cross sections in p--Pb and pp collisions as a function of rapidity, at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 8.16$ TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Double ratio of $\psi$(2S) and J/$\psi$ cross sections in p--Pb and pp collisions as a function of $p_{\rm T}$, at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 8.16$ TeV at forward rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Double ratio of $\psi$(2S) and J/$\psi$ cross sections in p--Pb and pp collisions as a function of $p_{\rm T}$, at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 8.16$ TeV at backward rapidity. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Inclusive $\psi(2{\rm S})$ cross section times branching ratio for backward and forward rapidity, in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

Inclusive $\psi(2{\rm S})$ $R_{\rm pPb}$ values for backward and forward rapidity at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(1S) differential cross section as a function of $p_{\rm T}$, at forward rapidity at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV .The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

$\Upsilon$(1S) differential cross section as a function of $p_{\rm T}$, at backward rapidity at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV .The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Ratio of $\Upsilon$(2S) over $\Upsilon$(1S) yields in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV .The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Ratio of $\Upsilon$(3S) over $\Upsilon$(1S) yields in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV .The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

$\Upsilon$(1S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ values at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(1S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ as a function of $y_{\rm {cms}}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(1S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ at backward rapidity at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(1S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ at forward rapidity at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(1S) $Q_{\rm pPb}$ as a function of $<N_{\rm coll}>$ at backward rapidity at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(1S) $Q_{\rm pPb}$ as a function of $<N_{\rm coll}>$ at forward rapidity at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(1S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ values at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(2S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ values at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

$\Upsilon$(3S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ values at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the uncorrelated systematic, while the third one is a correlated systematic uncertainty.

Ratio of $\Upsilon$(2S) to $\Upsilon$(1S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV as a function of $y_{\rm cms}$ .The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Ratio of $\Upsilon$(3S) to $\Upsilon$(1S) $R_{\rm pPb}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV as a function of $y_{\rm cms}$ .The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second is the systematic.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction as a function of the resonance pole mass for the G$^*$. The LO theoretical cross section for the G$^*$ production is also shown.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction as a function of the resonance pole mass for the EGM W'. The NNLO theoretical cross section for the EGM W' production is also shown.

Ratio of the Z'NU to Z'SSM acceptance times efficiency (ACC*EFF) in the lep-had channel as a function of sin^2phi and the Z' mass.

Z' SSM acceptance (ACC) and product of acceptance and efficiency (ACC*EFF) for the had-had and lep-had selections as a function of the Z' mass.

Number of expected Z'SSM signal (NS), background (NB) and observed (N) events passing the total transverse mass ($m_{\rm T}^{\rm tot}$) threshold in the had-had and lep-had channels.

Median expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction to tau+tau- for Z'SSM production for the exclusive had-had and lep-had channels, and for both channels combined.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction to tau+tau- for Z'L and Z'R production for the combination of the had-had and lep-had channels.

Observed 95% CL lower limit on the Z'NU mass as a function of sin^2(phi).

Expected and observed event yields for signal regions with at least 7 jets as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Expected and observed event yields for signal regions with at least 7 jets with at least 1 b-tag as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Expected and observed event yields for signal regions with at least 7 jets with at least 2 b-tags as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Table showing the predicted yields in the SM and observed number of events in SR1 as well as all signal mass points.

Table showing the predicted yields in the SM and observed number of events in SR100 as well as three representative signal scenarios.

Table showing the predicted yields in the SM and observed number of events in SR250 as well as three representative signal scenarios.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from SR100 or SR250.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from SR100 or SR250.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from the jet-counting analysis when using signal regions without b-tag requirements.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from the jet-counting analysis when using signal regions without b-tag requirements.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from the jet-counting analysis when allowing b-tags.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from the jet-counting analysis when allowing b-tags.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the resolved analysis when b-tags are not allowed.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the resolved analysis when b-tags are allowed.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR1 is used for each mass point.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR1 is used for each mass point.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR1 is used for each mass point.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR100 is used for each mass point.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR100 is used for each mass point.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR100 is used for each mass point.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR250 is used for each mass point.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR250 is used for each mass point.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR250 is used for each mass point.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when the best SR is used for each mass point.

Acceptance times efficiency in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, when SR1 is used in each point.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for signal regions with at least 7 jets as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for signal regions with at least 7 jets with at least 1 b-tag as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for signal regions with at least 7 jets with at least 2 b-tags as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $W\mu\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured dilepton invariant mass distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured transverse mass distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured dilepton invariant mass distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of $E_{T}^{miss}$ for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of leading jet $p_{T}$ for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_{T}$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ for SR9 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for SR9 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Observed and expected 95$\%$ CL limit on the fundamental Planck scale in $4+n$ dimensions, $M_D$, as a function of the number of extra dimensions. In the figure the two results overlap. The shaded areas around the expected limit indicate the expected $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ ranges of limits in the absence of a signal. The 95$\%$ CL observed limits after the suppression of the events with $\hat{s} > M_D^2$ is applied (truncated) are also given.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the scalar operator D1. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the vector operator D5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the axial vector operator D8. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the tensor operator D9. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the gluon operator D11. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the gluon operator C5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Observed 95% CL limits on the suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass Mmed, assuming a Z'-like boson in a simplified model and a DM mass of 50 GeV and 400 GeV. The width of the mediator is varied between Mmed/3 and Mmed/8pi.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of couplings of the simplified model vertex in the plane of mediator and WIMP mass (Mmed versus m_chi).

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-independent interactions, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-dependent interactions, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon annihilation cross section as a function of m_chi, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for degenerate squark/gluino masses.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 1/2 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 1/4 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 2 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 4 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

Observed and expected 95$\%$ CL upper limit on $\sigma \times {\rm{BR}}(H \to {\rm{invisible}})$ as a function of the Higgs boson mass.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the scalar operator C1. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Distribution of the transverse mass of the $W$-candidate $m_{\rm T}^{W}$ for the one lepton and two $b$-jets channel in SRlbb-1 and SRlbb-2, $m_{bb}$ sidebands. The background histograms are obtained from the background-only fit, and their uncertainty represents the total background uncertainty after the fit. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of the number of $b$-jets for the one lepton and two $b$-jets channel in SRlbb-1 and SRlbb-2 without the b-jet multiplicity requirement, central $m_{bb}$ bin. The background histograms are obtained from the background-only fit, and their uncertainty represents the total background uncertainty after the fit.

Distribution of the invariant mass of the $b$-jets $m_{bb}$ for the one lepton and two $b$-jets channel in the SRlbb-1 and SRlbb-2. The background histograms are obtained from the background-only fit, and their uncertainty represents the total background uncertainty after the fit.

Distribution of missing transverse momentum $E_{\rm T}^{\rm miss}$ in the one lepton and two photons signal regions SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1 and SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2 for the Higgs-mass window ($120\lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 130$ GeV). The final column (background) is a simulation-based cross check. The contributions from non-Higgs backgrounds are scaled by 10 GeV / 50 GeV = 0.2 from the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ sideband ($100 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 120$ GeV and $130 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 160$ GeV) into the Higgs-mass window. The last bin includes overflow. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Distribution of the azimuth difference between the $W$ and Higgs boson candidates $\Delta\phi(W,h)$ in the one lepton and two photons signal regions SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1 and SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2 for the Higgs-mass window ($120\lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 130$ GeV). The final column (background) is a simulation-based cross check. The contributions from non-Higgs backgrounds are scaled by 10 GeV / 50 GeV = 0.2 from the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ sideband ($100 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 120$ GeV and $130 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 160$ GeV) into the Higgs-mass window. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Distribution of the transverse mass of the $W$ and photon system $m_{\rm{T}}^{W\gamma_1}$ in the one lepton and two photons signal regions SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1 and SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2 for the Higgs-mass window ($120\lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 130$ GeV). The final column (background) is a simulation-based cross check. The contributions from non-Higgs backgrounds are scaled by 10 GeV / 50 GeV = 0.2 from the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ sideband ($100 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 120$ GeV and $130 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 160$ GeV) into the Higgs-mass window. The last bin includes overflow. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Distribution of the transverse mass of the $W$ and photon system $m_{\rm{T}}^{W\gamma_2}$ in the one lepton and two photons signal regions SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1 and SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2 for the Higgs-mass window ($120\lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 130$ GeV). The final column (background) is a simulation-based cross check. The contributions from non-Higgs backgrounds are scaled by 10 GeV / 50 GeV = 0.2 from the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ sideband ($100 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 120$ GeV and $130 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 160$ GeV) into the Higgs-mass window. The last bin includes overflow. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Results of the background-only fit to the diphoton invariant mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, distribution in the one lepton and two photons signal region SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1. The contributions from SM Higgs boson production are constrained to the MC prediction and associated systematic uncertainties. The fit is performed on events with 100 GeV $ \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt $ 160 GeV, with events in SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 or SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 in the Higgs-mass window (120 GeV $\le m_{\gamma\gamma} \le$ 130 GeV) excluded from the fit.

Results of the background-only fit to the diphoton invariant mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, distribution in the one lepton and two photons signal region SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2. The contributions from SM Higgs boson production are constrained to the MC prediction and associated systematic uncertainties. The fit is performed on events with 100 GeV $ \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt $ 160 GeV, with events in SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 or SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 in the Higgs-mass window (120 GeV $\le m_{\gamma\gamma} \le$ 130 GeV) excluded from the fit.

Results of the background-only fit to the diphoton invariant mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, distribution in the one lepton and two photons validation region VR$l\gamma\gamma$-1. The contributions from SM Higgs boson production are constrained to the MC prediction and associated systematic uncertainties. The fit is performed on events with 100 GeV $ \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt $ 160 GeV, with events in SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 or SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 in the Higgs-mass window (120 GeV $\le m_{\gamma\gamma} \le$ 130 GeV) excluded from the fit.

Results of the background-only fit to the diphoton invariant mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, distribution in the one lepton and two photons validation region VR$l\gamma\gamma$-2. The contributions from SM Higgs boson production are constrained to the MC prediction and associated systematic uncertainties. The fit is performed on events with 100 GeV $ \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt $ 160 GeV, with events in SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 or SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 in the Higgs-mass window (120 GeV $\le m_{\gamma\gamma} \le$ 130 GeV) excluded from the fit.

Distribution of effective mass $m_{\rm eff}$ in the validation region of the same-sign $e\mu$ channel. This validation region is defined by requiring one, two, or three jets, and reversing the $m_{lj}$, $m_{ljj}$ criteria. The distribution of a signal hypothesis is also shown.

Distribution of effective mass $m_{\rm eff}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with one jet SR$ll$-1. SR$ll$-1 is the sum of SR$ee$-1, SR$e\mu$-1, and SR$\mu\mu$-1. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{\rm eff}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of effective mass $m_{\rm eff}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with two or three jets SR$ll$-2. SR$ll$-2 is the sum of SR$ee$-2, SR$e\mu$-2, and SR$\mu\mu$-2. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{\rm eff}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of largest transverse mass $m_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with one jet SR$ll$-1. SR$ll$-1 is the sum of SR$ee$-1, SR$e\mu$-1, and SR$\mu\mu$-1. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of largest transverse mass $m_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with two or three jets SR$ll$-2. SR$ll$-2 is the sum of SR$ee$-2, SR$e\mu$-2, and SR$\mu\mu$-2. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of invariant mass of lepton and jet $m_{lj}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with one jet SR$ll$-1. SR$ll$-1 is the sum of SR$ee$-1, SR$e\mu$-1, and SR$\mu\mu$-1. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{lj}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of invariant mass of lepton and di-jet $m_{ljj}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with two or three jets SR$ll$-2. SR$ll$-2 is the sum of SR$ee$-2, SR$e\mu$-2, and SR$\mu\mu$-2. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{ljj}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

One lepton and two $b$-jets channel: observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section normalised by the simplified model prediction as a function of the common mass $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}^0_2}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}=0$.

One lepton and two photons channel: observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section normalised by the simplified model prediction as a function of the common mass $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}^0_2}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}=0$.

Same-sign dilepton channel: observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section normalised by the simplified model prediction as a function of the common mass $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}^0_2}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}=0$.

Combination: observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section normalised by the simplified model prediction as a function of the common mass $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}^0_2}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}=0$. This combination is obtained using the result from the ATLAS three-lepton search, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2014) 169, in addition to the three channels reported in this paper.

One lepton and two b-jets channel: Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

One lepton and two b-jets channel: Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

One lepton and two photons channel: Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

One lepton and two photons channel: Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Same-sign dilepton channel: Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Same-sign dilepton channel: Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Combination: Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Combination: Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Combination: excluded model cross-section at 95% CL IN PB.

Acceptance SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1.

Acceptance SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2.

Efficiency SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1.

Efficiency SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2.

$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 region for the full $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ window. The last column (background) is from a simulation-based cross check. $Z\gamma$ events, with $Z\rightarrow{ee}$ and one electron mis-identified as a photon, are included in the $Z\gamma(\gamma)$ background. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 region for the full $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ window. The last column (background) is from a simulation-based cross check. $Z\gamma$ events, with $Z\rightarrow{ee}$ and one electron mis-identified as a photon, are included in the $Z\gamma(\gamma)$ background. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the VR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 region for the full $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ window. The last column (background) is from a simulation-based cross check. $Z\gamma$ events, with $Z\rightarrow{ee}$ and one electron mis-identified as a photon, are included in the $Z\gamma(\gamma)$ background. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the VR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 region for the full $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ window. The last column (background) is from a simulation-based cross check. $Z\gamma$ events, with $Z\rightarrow{ee}$ and one electron mis-identified as a photon, are included in the $Z\gamma(\gamma)$ background. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Acceptance for SRlbb-1, central $m_{bb}$ bin.

Acceptance for SRlbb-1, $m_{bb}$ sideband.

Acceptance for SRlbb-2, central $m_{bb}$ bin.

Acceptance for SRlbb-2, $m_{bb}$ sideband.

Efficiency for SRlbb-1, central $m_{bb}$ bin.

Efficiency for SRlbb-1, $m_{bb}$ sideband.

Efficiency for SRlbb-2, central $m_{bb}$ bin.

Efficiency for SRlbb-2, $m_{bb}$ sideband.

Acceptance for the same-sign $ee$ channel with one jet.

Acceptance for the same-sign $ee$ channel with two or three jets.

Acceptance for the same-sign $e\mu$ channel with one jet.

Acceptance for the same-sign $e\mu$ channel with two or three jets.

Acceptance for the same-sign $\mu\mu$ channel with one jet.

Acceptance for the same-sign $\mu\mu$ channel with two or three jets.

Efficiency for the same-sign $ee$ channel with one jet.

Efficiency for the same-sign $ee$ channel with two or three jets.

Efficiency for the same-sign $e\mu$ channel with one jet.

Efficiency for the same-sign $e\mu$ channel with two or three jets.

Efficiency for the same-sign $\mu\mu$ channel with one jet.

Efficiency for the same-sign $\mu\mu$ channel with two or three jets.

Observed and expected $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in soft dimuon signal region. The last bin includes the overflow.

Observed and expected $m_{eff}^{incl}$ distribution in hard single-lepton 3-jet signal region. The last bin includes the overflow.

Observed and expected $m_{eff}^{incl}$ distribution for hard single-lepton 5-jet signal region. The last bin includes the overflow.

Observed and expected $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution for hard single-lepton 6-jet signal region. The last bin includes the overflow.

Observed and expected $M_{R}'$ distribution for hard same-flavour dilepton low-multiplicity signal region. The last bin includes the overflow.

Observed and expected $M_{R}'$ distribution for hard same-flavour dilepton 3-jet signal region. The last bin includes the overflow.

Observed and expected $M_{R}'$ distribution for hard opposite-flavour dilepton low-multiplicity signal region. The last bin includes the overflow.

Observed and expected $M_{R}'$ distribution for hard opposite-flavour dilepton 3-jet opposite-flavour signal region. The last bin includes the overflow.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the mSUGRA/CMSSM model with $\tan\beta=30$, $A_{0}=-2m_{0}$ and $\mu > 0$.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the mSUGRA/CMSSM model with $\tan\beta=30$, $A_{0}=-2m_{0}$ and $\mu > 0$.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the bRPV MSUGRA/CMSSM model.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the bRPV MSUGRA/CMSSM model.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the natural gauge mediation with a stau NLSP model (nGM).

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the natural gauge mediation with a stau NLSP model (nGM).

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the non-universal higgs masses with gaugino mediation model (NUHMG).

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the non-universal higgs masses with gaugino mediation model (NUHMG).

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the minimal UED model from the combination of the hard dilepton and soft dilepton analyses.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the minimal UED model from the combination of the hard dilepton and soft dilepton analyses.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the minimal UED model from the hard dilepton analysis.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the minimal UED model from the hard dilepton analysis.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the minimal UED model from the soft dilepton analysis.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the minimal UED model from the soft dilepton analysis.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the simplified model with gluino-mediated top squark production where the top squark is assumed to decay exclusively via $\tilde{t} \rightarrow c \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the simplified model with gluino-mediated top squark production, where the top squark is assumed to decay exclusively via $\tilde{t} \rightarrow c \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the simplified model with gluino-mediated top squark production where the gluinos are assumed to decay exclusively through a virtual top squark, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow tt+\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the simplified model with gluino-mediated top squark production where the gluinos are assumed to decay exclusively through a virtual top squark, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow tt+\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the soft single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the soft single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the hard single-lepton analysis for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the hard single-lepton analysis for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the soft single-lepton analysis for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the soft single-lepton analysis for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the hard single-lepton analysis for the case in which x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the hard single-lepton analysis for the case in which x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the soft single-lepton analysis for the case in which x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model from the soft single-lepton analysis for the case in which x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the combination of soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the soft single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the soft single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons from the combination of the hard dilepton and hard single-lepton analyses.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons from the combination of the hard dilepton and hard single-lepton analyses.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons from the hard single-lepton analysis.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons from the hard single-lepton analysis.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons from the hard dilepton analysis.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons from the hard dilepton analysis.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons from the hard dilepton analysis.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons from the hard dilepton analysis.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model without sleptons from the hard single-lepton analysis.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model without sleptons from the hard single-lepton analysis.

Number of generated events in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Production cross-section in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Number of generated events in the the first- and second-generation squark simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV. squark decaying to quark neutralino1 with varying x.

Production cross-section in the the first- and second-generation squark simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Number of generated evens in the minimal UED model.

Production cross-section in the minimal UED model in pb.

Number of generated events in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Production cross-section in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Acceptance for soft single-lepton 3-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Efficiency for soft single-lepton 3-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Acceptance for soft single-lepton 5-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Efficiency for soft single-lepton 5-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Acceptance for soft single-lepton 3-jet inclusive signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Efficiency for the soft single-lepton 3-jet inclusive signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Expected CLs from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Expected CLs from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV. The chargino mass is parameterised using x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)).

Observed CLs from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Observed CLs from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV. The chargino mass is parameterised using x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)).

Acceptance for soft dimuon signal region in the minimal UED model (mUED).

Efficiency for soft dimuon signal region in minimal UED model (mUED).

Acceptance for hard dilepton 3-jet opposite-flavour signal region in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Efficiency for hard dilepton 3jet opposite-flavour signal region in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Acceptance for hard dilepton 3-jet same-flavour signal region in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Efficiency for hard dilepton 3-jet same-flavour signal region in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Acceptance for hard dilepton low-multiplicity opposite-flavour signal region in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Efficiency for hard dilepton low-multiplicity opposite-flavour signal region in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Acceptance for hard dilepton low-multiplicity same-flavour signal region in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Efficiency for hard dilepton low-multiplicity same-flavour signal region in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Best expected signal region in the minimal UED model (mUED).

Expected CLs from hard dilepton analysis in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Observed CLs from the hard dilepton analysis in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Expected CLs from the combination of the soft dimuon and hard dilepton analyses in the minimal UED model (mUED).

Observed CLs from the combination of the soft dimuon and hard dilepton analyses in the minimal UED model (mUED).

Acceptance for hard single-lepton 3-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Efficiency for hard single-lepton 3-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Acceptance for hard single-lepton 5-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Efficiency for hard single-lepton 5-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Acceptance for hard single-lepton 6-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Efficiency for hard single-lepton 6-jet signal region in the gluino simplified model for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Acceptance for hard single-lepton 3-jet signal region in the first- and second-generation squark simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Efficiency for hard single-lepton 3-jet signal region in the first- and second-generation squark simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Acceptance for hard single-lepton 5-jet signal region in the first- and second-generation squark simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Efficiency for hard single-lepton 5-jet signal region in the first- and second-generation squark simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Acceptance for hard single-lepton 6-jet signal region in the first- and second-generation squark simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Efficiency for hard single-lepton 6-jet signal region in the first- and second-generation squark simplified model for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Observed 95% upper limit on the visible cross-section in the gluino simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which the chargino mass is fixed at x = (m(gluino)-m(chargino))/(m(gluino)-m(LSP)) = 1/2.

Observed 95% upper limit on the visible cross-section in the first- and second-generation squark simplified model from the combination of the soft single-lepton and hard single-lepton analyses for the case in which x = (m(squark)-m(chargino))/(m(squark)-m(LSP)) is varied and the LSP mass is set at 60 GeV.

Observed 95% upper limit on the visible cross-section in the first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons from the hard dilepton analysis.

Observed 95% upper limit on the visible cross-section in the minimal UED model (mUED) from the combination of the soft dimuon and hard dilepton analyses.

95% C.L. observed exclusion contour for all regions combined.

Best expected signal region for signal points.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>150$ GeV.

95% C.L. expected exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>150 $ GeV region.

95% C.L. observed exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>150 $ GeV region.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>200$ GeV.

95% C.L. expected exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>200 $ GeV region.

95% C.L. observed exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>200 $ GeV region.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>250$ GeV.

95% C.L. expected exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>250 $ GeV region.

95% C.L. observed exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>250 $ GeV region.

95% CLs upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in C1.

95% CLs upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in C2.

Acceptance times Efficiency for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>150$ GeV.

Acceptance times Efficiency for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>200$ GeV.

Acceptance times Efficiency for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>250$ GeV.

Acceptance (flavour-blind) for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>150$ GeV.

Acceptance (flavour-blind) for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>200$ GeV.

Acceptance (flavour-blind) for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>250$ GeV.

Signal cross-sections and uncertainties.

The fiducial, inclusive (SPS+DPS) and DPS-subtracted differential cross-section ratio $\mathrm{d}R_{Z+J/\psi}/\mathrm{d}y$ as a function of $y_{J/\psi}$ for non-prompt $J/\psi$.

The inclusive (SPS+DPS) cross-section ratio $\mathrm{d}R_{Z+J/\psi}^\mathrm{incl}/\mathrm{d}p_\mathrm{T}$ for prompt and non-prompt $J/\psi$. Estimated DPS contributions for each bin, based on the assumptions made in this study, are presented.

The inclusive (SPS+DPS) cross-section ratio $\mathrm{d}R_{Z+J/\psi}^\mathrm{incl}/\mathrm{d}p_\mathrm{T}$ for prompt and non-prompt $J/\psi$. Estimated DPS contributions for each bin, based on the assumptions made in this study, are presented.

Lower limits at 95% CL on the mass of $H_{\mathrm{L}}^{\pm \pm}$ and $H_{\mathrm{R}}^{\pm \pm}$ bosons, assuming a 100% branching ratio to $e^{\pm}e^{\pm}$, $e^{\pm}/\mu^{\pm}$ and $\mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$ pairs. The $1\sigma$ variations are also shown for the expected limits.

Reconstructed mass $m_\beta$ in observed data, background estimate and expected signal ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ masses of 400 and 600 GeV) in the chargino search for the lower of the two masses ($m$) in the two-candidate signal region.

Reconstructed mass $m_\beta$ in observed data, background estimate and expected signal ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ masses of 400 and 600 GeV) in the chargino search for the one-loose-candidate signal region.

Reconstructed mass $m_\beta$ in observed data, background estimate and expected signal ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ masses of 400 and 600 GeV) in the chargino search for the one-candidate signal region.

Data and background estimates for the reconstructed mass based on time-of-flight, $m_{\beta}$, for combined candidates in the full-detector 500 GeV gluino R-Hadron search (SR-RH-FD).

Data and background estimates for the reconstructed mass based on specific energy loss, $m_{\beta\gamma}$, for combined candidates in the full-detector 500 GeV gluino R-Hadron search (SR-RH-FD).

Data and background estimates for the reconstructed mass based on time-of-flight, $m_{\beta}$, for the MS-agnostic 500 GeV sbottom and $m_{\beta\gamma}$ R-Hadron search (SR-RH-MA).

Data and background estimates for the reconstructed mass based on specific energy loss, $m_{\beta\gamma}$, for the MS-agnostic 500 GeV stop R-Hadron search (SR-RH-MA).

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 10$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 20$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 30$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 40$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 50$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for directly produced sleptons in the plane $\Delta=m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\tau}_1)$ vs. $m(\tilde{\tau}_1)$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for directly produced sleptons in the plane $\Delta=m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\tau}_1)$ vs. $m(\tilde{\tau}_1)$.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the $\tilde{\tau}_1$ mass for direct $\tilde{\tau}_1$ production and three values of $\tan\beta$. Expected limits for $\tan\beta=10$ with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties observed limits for three values of $\tan\beta$ and theoretical cross-section prediction for $\tan\beta=10$ with $\pm 1\sigma$ band.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_1$ mass for $\tilde{\tau}_1$ sleptons resulting from the decay of directly produced charginos and neutralinos in GMSB. Observed limits, expected limits for $\tan\beta=10$ with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties and theoretical cross-section prediction (dominated by $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^+_1$ production) with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainty. Depending on the hypothesis and to a small extent on $\tan\beta$, in these models, the chargino mass is 210 to 260 GeV higher than the neutralino mass.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the LeptoSUSY model.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the LeptoSUSY model.

Cross-section upper limits for various chargino masses in stable-chargino models. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the gluino R-Hadron models for the MS-agnostic search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the gluino R-Hadron models for the full-detector search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the sbottom R-Hadron models for the MS-agnostic search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the sbottom R-Hadron models for the full-detector search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the stop R-Hadron models for the MS-agnostic search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the stop R-Hadron models for the full-detector search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Summary of systematic uncertainties for the slepton searches (given in percent). Ranges indicate a mass dependence for the given uncertainty (low mass to high mass).

Summary of systematic uncertainties for the chargino and R-Hadron searches (given in percent). Ranges indicate a mass dependence for the given uncertainty (low mass to high mass).

Observed and expected event yields, as well as efficiencies and uncertainties for three MC simulation signal samples, in the two signal regions used in the GMSB slepton search. Cross-section upper limits are stated at 95% CL.

Observed and expected event yields, as well as efficiencies and uncertainties for three MC simulation signal samples, in the three signal regions used in the LeptoSUSY slepton search. Cross-section upper limits are stated at 95% CL.

Observed and expected event yields, as well as efficiencies and uncertainties for three MC simulation signal samples, in the three signal regions used in the chargino search. Cross-section upper limits are stated at 95% CL.

Observed and expected event yields, as well as efficiencies and uncertainties for three MC simulation signal samples, in the R-Hadron searches. Cross-section upper limits are stated at 95% CL.

Mass of the $\tilde{\tau}_1$; cross-section; minimum $p_T$, maximum $\beta$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected number of signal events (exp.); signal selection efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for the two signal regions used in the GMSB slepton search.

Mass of the $\tilde{\tau}_1$; cross-section; minimum \pt, maximum $\beta$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected number of signal events (exp.); signal selection efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for the two signal regions used in the directly produced $\tilde{\tau}_1$ search.

Masses of the $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{q}$; cross-section; minimum \pt, maximum $\beta$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected number of signal events (exp.); signal selection efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for the two signal regions used in the LeptoSUSY search.

Slepton search candidate requirements and example candidate selection flow for loose and tight selections.

Mass of the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}$; cross-section; minimum $p_T$, maximum $\beta$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected number of signal events (exp.); signal selection efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for the three signal regions used in the chargino search.

Chargino search candidate requirements and example candidate selection flow for the total production as well as chargino-neutralino (CN) and chargino-pair (CC) production separately.

Mass of the LLP; cross-section; minimum $p$, maximum $\beta\gamma$, maximum $\beta$, minimum $m_{\beta\gamma}$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected signal (exp.); signal efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for all R-Hadron models considered in the R-Hadron MS-agnostic (SR-RH-MA) search.

Mass of the LLP; cross-section; minimum $p$, maximum $\beta\gamma$, maximum $\beta$, minimum $m_{\beta\gamma}$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected signal (exp.); signal efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for all R-Hadron models considered in the R-Hadron full-detector (SR-RH-FD) search. In cases where two numbers are stated, these reflect the values in the ID+calorimeter and combined selection, respectively, used in this search.

Muon-agnostic search R-Hadron candidate requirements and example candidate selection flow for ID+calorimeter selection.

Full-detector search R-Hadron candidate requirements and example candidate selection flow for combined selection.

The fiducial efficiency for electrons and taus in different $\eta$ ranges ($\epsilon_{\mathrm{fid}}(\eta)$). For electrons from tau decays, the $\eta$ is that of the electron, not the tau. The uncertainties shown reflect the statistical uncertainties of the simulated samples only. UPDATE (18 MAY 2015): Updated fiducial lepton efficiencies.

Expected and observed event yields for the $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{leptons}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the minimum $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the $b$-tag signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the inclusive $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$, $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$m_{\mathrm{T}}^{W}$, $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}$, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the low-$H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}$, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{leptons}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell\mathrm{,min}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on the number of $b$-tagged jets.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ [GeV]. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}\geq 100$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ [GeV]. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{W}\geq 100$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}\geq 150$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}} < 150$ GeV.

Distribution of ETmiss in the signal region for data and for the background predicted from the fit in the CRs. Overflows are included in the final bin.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the vector operator D5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the axial-vector operator D8. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the tensor operator D9. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-independent and spin-dependent interactions, for a coupling strength g = sqrt(g_f g_chi) of unity or the maximum value (4 pi) that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 95% C.L. on the WIMP simplified model coupling parameter, sqrt(g_f g_chi), with vector coupling and mediator width Gamma=m_V/3, as a function of WIMP (m_chi) and the mediator particle (m_V) masses.

Observed lower limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass mV, for a Z'-like mediator with vector interactions. For a dark-matter mass m_chi of 50 or 400 GeV, results are shown for different values of the mediator total decay width Gamma.

Observed lower limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass mV, for a Z'-like mediator with axial-vector interactions. For a dark-matter mass m_chi of 50 or 400 GeV, results are shown for different values of the mediator total decay width Gamma.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the effective mass scale M* in the (k2, k1) parameter plane for the s-channel EFT model inspired by Fermi-LAT gamma-ray line, for m_chi = 130 GeV. The upper part of the plane is excluded.

Lower limits at 95% C.L. on the mass scale M_D in the ADD models of large extra dimensions, for several values of the number of extra dimensions.

Upper limits at 95% C.L. on the cross section for the compressed squark model, as a function of the squark mass, m_squark, and of the difference between the squark mass and the mass of the neutralino, m_squark-m_neutralino, in the compressed region of m_squark-m_neutralino < 50 GeV.

Expected CLs contour in the GMSB (LAMBDA, TAU(NEUTRALINO) ) signal space.

Expected CLs contour with minus 1-sigma in the GMSB (LAMBDA, TAU(NEUTRALINO) ) signal space.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma in the GMSB (LAMBDA, TAU(NEUTRALINO) ) signal space.

The total expected and observed limits on SPS8 cross-section [fb] for each signal point.

The total expected and observed limits on number of accepted signal events for each signal point.

The total normalization systematic for each signal point.

Cutflow showing the number of events passing various cuts for the $\Lambda =$ 300 TeV, $\tau =$ 2 ns GMSB SPS8 signal point.

The number of events in the signal region sub-divided into the different bins used in the limit setting procedure for the $\Lambda =$ 300 TeV, $\tau =$ 2 ns GMSB SPS8 signal point. Maximum values of $|t_\gamma| <$ 4 ns and $\Delta z_\gamma<$ 2000 mm have been applied to both photons in the event.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in the absolute value of cos(theta*) (second column). The given uncertainty includes statistical and systematic components. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg Minlo HJ for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF process, and Pythia 8 for the VH and ttH process. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. The fourth column gives the non-ggF prediction (total minus ggF). All predicted distributions were normalized to the best predicted inclusive Higgs production cross sections available at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in jet multiplicity (jet pT > 30 GeV) (second column). The given uncertainty includes statistical and systematic components. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg Minlo HJ for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF process, and Pythia 8 for the VH and ttH process. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. The fourth column gives the non-ggF prediction (total minus ggF). All predicted distributions were normalized to the best predicted inclusive Higgs production cross sections available at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in the transverse momentum of the leading jet (second column). The given uncertainty includes statistical and systematic components. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg Minlo HJ for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF process, and Pythia 8 for the VH and ttH process. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. The fourth column gives the non-ggF prediction (total minus ggF). All predicted distributions were normalized to the best predicted inclusive Higgs production cross sections available at the time of the publication.

Selection acceptance times efficiency as a function of WPRIME mass at truth level for left- and right-handed WPRIME MC. The total efficiency curves correspond to the sum of the efficiencies of the one b-tag and two b-tag categories.

Cutflow (efficiency with respect to total number of events in %) for several WPRIME masses in the left-handed and in the right-handed model for hadronic top-quark decays.

Overview of the signal acceptance times efficiency (A x Eff) for the hadronic top-quark decay for both categories, the predicted cross section times branching ratio to TOP BOTTOM, as well as the observed 95% CL limit on the cross section times branching ratio for several WPRIME masses in the left-handed and in the right-handed model. The expected signal event yields in the two categories for 20.3 fb-1 of 8 TeV data are also shown.

Spectrum of ETmiss for the muon channel after the event selection. The spectrum is shown with the requirement MT > 252 GeV.

Spectrum of MT for the electron channel after the event selection.

Spectrum of MT for the muon channel after the event selection.

Observed and expected limits on SIGMA*B for WPRIME at 95% CL in the electron channel.

Observed and expected limits on SIGMA*B for W* at 95% CL in the electron channel.

Observed and expected limits on SIGMA*B for WPRIME at 95% CL in the muon channel.

Observed and expected limits on SIGMA*B for W* at 95% CL in the muon channel.

Observed and expected limits on SIGMA*B for WPRIME at 95% CL for the combination of the electron and muon channels.

Observed and expected limits on SIGMA*B for W* at 95% CL for the combination of the electron and muon channels.

Observed limits on M* as a function of the DM particle mass M(chi) at 90% CL for the combination of the electron and muon channel for various operators in the EFT.

Observed limits on the DM-nucleon scattering cross-section as a function of M(chi) at 90% CL for various operators in the EFT.

Observed limits on M* as a function of the DM particle mass M(chi) at 90% CL in the electron for various operators in the EFT.

Observed limits on M* as a function of the DM particle mass M(chi) at 90% CL in the muon for various operators in the EFT.

Observed limits on M* as a function of the DM particle mass M(chi) at 95% CL in the electron for various operators in the EFT.

Observed limits on M* as a function of the DM particle mass M(chi) at 95% CL in the muon for various operators in the EFT.

Observed limits on M* as a function of the DM particle mass M(chi) at 95% CL for the combination of the electron and muon channel for various operators in the EFT.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of absolute rapidity of diphoton system. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of multiplicity of jets with transverse momentum pT(jet) > 30 GeV. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of multiplicity of jets with transverse momentum pT(jet) > 30 GeV. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of multiplicity of jets with transverse momentum pT(jet) > 30 GeV. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of multiplicity of jets with transverse momentum pT(jet) > 30 GeV. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of transverse momentum of the leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of transverse momentum of the leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of absolute rapidity of the leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of absolute rapidity of the leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of scalar transverse momentum sum of all jets. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of scalar transverse momentum sum of all jets. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of transverse momentum of second leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of transverse momentum of second leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of rapidity separation of leading two jets. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of rapidity separation of leading two jets. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of azimuthal angle between diphoton and dijet systems. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of azimuthal angle between diphoton and dijet systems. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of cosine of the decay angle in the Collins-Soper frame. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of cosine of the decay angle in the Collins-Soper frame. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of cosine of the decay angle in the Collins-Soper frame. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of cosine of the decay angle in the Collins-Soper frame. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of azimuthal angle between the two leading jets. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of azimuthal angle between the two leading jets. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of diphoton thrust pT. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of diphoton thrust pT. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of rapidity separation of the two photons. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of rapidity separation of the two photons. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of tau of highest-tau jet (see paper for description). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of tau of highest-tau jet (see paper for description). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of scalar sum of tau for all jets (see paper for description). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of scalar sum of tau for all jets (see paper for description). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of absolute rapidity of second leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of absolute rapidity of second leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of transverse momentum of third leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of transverse momentum of third leading jet. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of dijet invariant mass. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of dijet invariant mass. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of transverse momentum of the combined diphoton and dijet system. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of transverse momentum of the combined diphoton and dijet system. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of cosine of the decay angle in the Collins-Soper frame in bins of diphoton transverse momentum. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of cosine of the decay angle in the Collins-Soper frame in bins of diphoton transverse momentum. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of diphoton transverse momentum in jet multiplicity bins. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of diphoton transverse momentum in jet multiplicity bins. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of leading jet transverse momentum for exclusive one-jet events. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of leading jet transverse momentum for exclusive one-jet events. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.

Diphoton kinematic acceptances in percent for gluon fusion for each fiducial region/variable bin studied in this paper, defined as the probability to fulfil the diphoton kinematic criteria: pT(2gam) < 0.35 (0.25) for the leading (subleading) photon and |eta(gam)|<2.37. The factors are evaluated using the POWHEG event generator with MPI modelling and hadronisation turned off. Consistent results for the diphoton variables are obtained by HRes 2.2. Uncertainties are taken from PDF variations. QCD scale varaitions have a negligible impact on these factors.

Diphoton kinematic acceptances in percent for gluon fusion for each fiducial region/variable bin studied in this paper, defined as the probability to fulfil the diphoton kinematic criteria: pT(2gam) < 0.35 (0.25) for the leading (subleading) photon and |eta(gam)|<2.37. The factors are evaluated using the POWHEG event generator with MPI modelling and hadronisation turned off. Consistent results for the diphoton variables are obtained by HRes 2.2. Uncertainties are taken from PDF variations. QCD scale varaitions have a negligible impact on these factors.

Isolation efficiencies in percent for gluon fusion H -> 2gam for each fiducial region/variable bin measured in this analysis. The isolation efficiency is defined as the probability for both photons to fulfil the isolation criteria (ETiso < 14 GeV as described in the text) for events that pass the diphoton kinematic criteria. Uncertainties are assigned in the same way as for the non-perturbative correction factors: by varying the fragmentation and underlying event modelling. These factors can be multiplied by the kinematic acceptance factors (see table~ ef{tab:fid_acceptance}) to extrapolate an inclusive gluon fusion Higgs prediction to the fiducial volume used in this analysis.

Isolation efficiencies in percent for gluon fusion H -> 2gam for each fiducial region/variable bin measured in this analysis. The isolation efficiency is defined as the probability for both photons to fulfil the isolation criteria (ETiso < 14 GeV as described in the text) for events that pass the diphoton kinematic criteria. Uncertainties are assigned in the same way as for the non-perturbative correction factors: by varying the fragmentation and underlying event modelling. These factors can be multiplied by the kinematic acceptance factors (see table~ ef{tab:fid_acceptance}) to extrapolate an inclusive gluon fusion Higgs prediction to the fiducial volume used in this analysis.

Non-perturbative correction factors in percent accounting for the impact of hadronisation and the underlying event activity for all measured variables and fiducial regions. Uncertainties are evaluated by deriving these factors using different generators and tunes as described in the text.

Non-perturbative correction factors in percent accounting for the impact of hadronisation and the underlying event activity for all measured variables and fiducial regions. Uncertainties are evaluated by deriving these factors using different generators and tunes as described in the text.

Fiducial cross sections in fb from WH, ZH and ttH combined, in each variable bin and fiducial region.

Fiducial cross sections in fb from WH, ZH and ttH combined, in each variable bin and fiducial region.

Statistical bin-to-bin correlations between the 24 bins used in the analysis described in Phys.Lett. B753 (2016) 69-85 (arXiv:1508.02507). See Figure 3 of this paper for the bins used.

Reconstructed $\cos\theta^*$ distributions for data and the SM background estimate in the dimuon channel.

Reconstructed $A_{\rm FB}$ distributions for data and the SM background estimate as a function of dielectron mass.

Reconstructed $A_{\rm FB}$ distributions for data and the SM background estimate as a function of dimuon mass.

Summary of 95% C.L. lower exclusion limits on $\Lambda$ for the combined dilepton contact interaction search, using a uniform positive prior in 1/$\Lambda^2$.

Summary of 95% C.L. lower exclusion limits on $M_{\rm S}$ for the combined dilepton ADD large extra dimensions search, using a uniform positive prior in 1/$M_{\rm S}^8$.

Reconstructed $\cos\theta^*$ distributions for data and the SM background estimate in the electron channel.

Reconstructed $\cos\theta^*$ distributions for data and the SM background estimate in the muon channel.

Expected and observed $am_{T2}$ distribution for bCd_high1 SR, before applying the $am_{T2}>200$ GeV requirement. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed leading b-jet $p_T$ distribution for bCd_high2 SR, before applying the leading b-jet $p_T>170$ GeV requirement. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for tNbC_mix SR, before applying the $E_T^{miss}>270$ GeV requirement. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed lepton $p_T$ distribution for bCa_low SR. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed lepton $p_T$ distribution for bCa_med SR. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed $am_T2$ distribution for bCb_med1 SR. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed $am_T2$ distribution for bCb_high SR. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1$ three-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bW\chi^0_1$). This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1$ four-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bff'\chi^0_1$). This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=150$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=106$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+5$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\tilde t_1}-10$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}=300$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Upper limits on the model cross-section for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1$ three-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bW\chi^0_1$).

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1$ three-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bW\chi^0_1$).

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1$ three-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bW\chi^0_1$).

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1$ four-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bff'\chi^0_1$).

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1$ four-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bff'\chi^0_1$).

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1$ four-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bff'\chi^0_1$).

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=150$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=150$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=150$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=106$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=106$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=106$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+5$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+5$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+5$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\tilde t_1}-10$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\tilde t_1}-10$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\tilde t_1}-10$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}=300$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}=300$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}=300$ GeV.

Acceptance of tN_diag SR ($E_T^{miss}>150$ GeV, $m_T>140$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of tN_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of tN_boost SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCb_med2 SR ($am_{T2}>250$ GeV, $m_T>60$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCc_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCd_bulk SR ($am_{T2}>175$ GeV, $m_T>120$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCd_high1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCd_high2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCa_med for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCa_low for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCb_med1 for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCb_high for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of 3-body SR ($80<am_{T2}<90$ GeV, $m_T>120$ GeV) for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$). The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of tNbC_mix SR for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Efficiency of tN_diag SR ($E_T^{miss}>150$ GeV, $m_T>140$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of tN_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of tN_boost SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCb_med2 SR ($am_{T2}>250$ GeV, $m_T>60$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCc_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCd_bulk SR ($am_{T2}>175$ GeV, $m_T>120$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCd_high1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCd_high2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCa_med for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCa_low for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCb_med1 for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCb_high for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of 3-body SR ($80<am_{T2}<90$ GeV, $m_T>120$ GeV) for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$). The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of tNbC_mix SR for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Number of generated events for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Number of generated events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Number of generated events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV; $E_T^{miss}$(gen)$>60$ GeV.

Number of generated events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV; $E_T^{miss}$(gen)$>250$ GeV.

Number of generated events for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$).

Number of generated events for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Cross-section for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Cross-section for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Cross-section for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Cross-section for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$).

Cross-section for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected tN_diag SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$, using the 2 highest $E_T^{miss}$ and 2 highest $m_T$ bins.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected tN_med SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected tN_boost SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCb_med2 SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$, using the 2 highest $am_{T2}$ and 2 highest $m_T$ bins.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCc_diag SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCd_bulk SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$, using the 2 highest $am_{T2}$ and 2 highest $m_T$ bins.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCd_high1 SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCd_high2 SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCa_med SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCa_low SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCb_med1 SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCb_high SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected 3-body SR yields for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$), using the 2 lowest $am_{T2}$ and 2 highest $m_T$ bins.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected tNbC_mix SR yields for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in tN_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in tN_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in tN_boost SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCb_med2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCc_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCd_bulk SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCd_high1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCd_high2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCa_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed CLs in bCa_low SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed CLs in bCb_med1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed CLs in bCb_high SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed CLs in 3-body SR for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$).

Observed CLs in tNbC_mix SR for the mixed scenario (50% $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, 50% $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^0_1$).

Expected CLs in tN_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in tN_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in tN_boost SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCb_med2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCc_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCd_bulk SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCd_high1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCd_high2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCa_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected CLs in bCa_low SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected CLs in bCb_med1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected CLs in bCb_high SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected CLs in 3-body SR for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$).

Expected CLs in tNbC_mix SR for the mixed scenario (50% $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, 50% $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$).

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $W \rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $W \rightarrow e \nu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $W \rightarrow e \nu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $Z \rightarrow \mu \mu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $Z \rightarrow \mu \mu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $W\rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $W\rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $W\rightarrow e \nu$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $W\rightarrow e \nu$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $Z\rightarrow ll$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $Z\rightarrow ll$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the t-(anti)-t control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the t-(anti)-t control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the V3 selections compared to the SM predictions.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the V4 selections compared to the SM predictions.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the V5 selections compared to the SM predictions.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the V5 selections compared to the SM predictions.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the M2 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the M2 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the M3 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the M3 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the C1 selection before the cut in the variable shown is applied. The data are compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the C1 selection before the cut in the variable shown is applied. The data are compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ for the C2 selection. The data are compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured jet multiplicity for the C2 selection. The data are compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

The measured $W$ transverse mass distribution in the $W \rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region for the M1 monojet-like selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $W$ transverse mass distribution in the $W \rightarrow e \nu$ control region for the M1 monojet-like selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured dimuon invariant mass distribution in the $Z \rightarrow \mu \mu$ control region for the M1 monojet-like selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in a multijet control sample for the monojet-like analysis. This region is defined with similar $E_T^{miss}$ and leading jet $p_T$ cuts as M1, but releasing the jet-veto and inverting the $\Delta \phi (jet, p_T^{miss})$ cut, now requiring it to be less than 0.4. The data are compared to predictions.

Measured jet multiplicity in the $W \rightarrow e \nu$ control region for the c-tagged analysis, compared to background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured jet multiplicity in the $W \rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region for the c-tagged analysis, compared to background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured jet multiplicity in the $Z \rightarrow ll$ control region for the c-tagged analysis, compared to background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured jet multiplicity in the t-(anti)-t control region for the c-tagged analysis, compared to background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured dilepton invariant mass in the $Z \rightarrow ll$ control region for the c-tagged analysis. The predictions include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the impact of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $\eta$ distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the impact of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $\Delta \phi (jet, p_T^{miss})$ distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the impact of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution after preselection cuts compared to background predictions.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the C1 c-tagged selection compared to background predictions.

Multiplicity of jets with loose heavy-flavor tags in the C1 selection.

Multiplicity of jets with medium heavy-flavor tags in the C1 selection.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M1 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M2 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M3 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for C1 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for C2 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M1 SR for $\tilde{b}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M2 SR for $\tilde{b}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M3 SR for $\tilde{b}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M1 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + ff' + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M2 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + ff' + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M3 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + ff' + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

95% CL upper limits on the cross section [fb].

Number of signal events.

Acceptance [%].

Efficiency [%].

Experimental uncertainty.

Expected CLs.

Observed CLs.

Best signal region.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

95% CL upper limits on the cross section [fb].

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

95% CL upper limits on the cross section [fb].

Number of signal events.

Acceptance [%].

Efficiency [%].

Uncertainty [%].

Expected CLs.

Observed CLs.

Best signal region.

Best signal region.

Distribution of HT after the MTtau requirement for the 1-tau ''Tight'' SR. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in the CRs corresponding to MTtau below 130 GeV. Also shown is the expected signal from typical mSUGRA, GMSB and bRPV samples. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin.

Distribution of MTtau1 + MTtau2 in the 2tau channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR requirements on MTtau1 + MTtau2 and HT2j. To reduce the contributions from events with Z bosons decaying into tau leptons, the requirement MTtau1 + MTtau2 > 150 GeV is applied to all distributions. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in the CRs corresponding to HT2j below 550 GeV.

Distribution of HT2j in the 2tau channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR requirements on MTtau1 + MTtau2 and HT2j. To reduce the contributions from events with Z bosons decaying into tau leptons, the requirement MTtau1 + MTtau2 > 150 GeV is applied to all distributions. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in the CRs corresponding to HT2j below 550 GeV.

Distribution of the jet multiplicity in the 2tau channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR requirements on MTtau1 + MTtau2 and HT2j. To reduce the contributions from events with Z bosons decaying into tau leptons, the requirement MTtau1 + MTtau2 > 150 GeV is applied to all distributions. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in the CRs corresponding to HT2j below 550 GeV.

Distribution of the final kinematic variables in the tau+e channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR selections on Meff for the bRPV model. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in specific CRs. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin. There are no data events in the overflow bin after all analysis requirements are applied.

Distribution of the final kinematic variables in the tau+e channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR selections on MEFF for the GMSB model. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in specific CRs. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin. There are no data events in the overflow bin after all analysis requirements are applied.

Distribution of the final kinematic variables in the tau+e channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR selections on MET for the mSUGRA model. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in specific CRs. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin. There are no data events in the overflow bin after all analysis requirements are applied.

Distribution of the final kinematic variables in the tau+e channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR selections on MET for the nGM model. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in specific CRs. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin. There are no data events in the overflow bin after all analysis requirements are applied.

Distribution of the final kinematic variables in the tau+mu channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR selections on MEFF for the bRPV model. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in specific CRs. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin. There are no data events in the overflow bin after all analysis requirements are applied.

Distribution of the final kinematic variables in the tau+mu channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR selections on MEFF for the GMSB model. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in specific CRs. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin. There are no data events in the overflow bin after all analysis requirements are applied.

Distribution of the final kinematic variables in the tau+mu channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR selections on MET for the mSUGRA model. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in specific CRs. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin. There are no data events in the overflow bin after all analysis requirements are applied.

Distribution of the final kinematic variables in the tau+mu channel after all analysis requirements but the final SR selections on MET for the nGM model. The SM prediction includes the data-driven corrections discussed in the paper. MC events are normalized to data in specific CRs. The last bin in the expected background distribution is an overflow bin. There are no data events in the overflow bin after all analysis requirements are applied.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) using a combination of all channels. The result is obtained using 20.3 fb-1 of sqrt(s) = 8 TeV ATLAS data. Additional model parameters are M(mess) = 250 TeV, N5 = 3, mu>0 and Cgrav =1.

Expected 95% CL lower limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) using a combination of all channels. The result is obtained using 20.3 fb-1 of sqrt(s) = 8 TeV ATLAS data. Additional model parameters are M(mess) = 250 TeV, N5 = 3, mu>0 and Cgrav =1.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on the mSUGRA/CMSSM model parameters m0 and m1/2 for the combination of the 1tau, tau+e and tau+mu channels. Additional model parameters are A0 = -2m0, tan(beta) = 30 and sign(mu) = +1.

Expected 95% CL lower limits on the mSUGRA/CMSSM model parameters m0 and m1/2 for the combination of the 1tau, tau+e and tau+mu channels. Additional model parameters are A0 = -2m0, tan(beta) = 30 and sign(mu) = +1.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on the simplified nGM model parameters m(stau) and m(gluino) for the combination of the 2tau, tau+e and tau+mu channels. Additional squark and slepton mass parameters are set to 2.5 TeV, M1 = M2 = 2.5 TeV, and all trilinear coupling terms are set to zero. Also, the parameter mu is fixed to mu = 400 GeV.

Expected 95% CL lower limits on the simplified nGM model parameters m(stau) and m(gluino) for the combination of the 2tau, tau+e and tau+mu channels. Additional squark and slepton mass parameters are set to 2.5 TeV, M1 = M2 = 2.5 TeV, and all trilinear coupling terms are set to zero. Also, the parameter mu is fixed to mu = 400 GeV.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on the bRPV model parameters m0 and m1/2 for the combination of all channels. Additional model parameters are A0 = -2m0 , tan(beta) = 30 and sign(mu) = +1.

Expected 95% CL lower limits on the bRPV model parameters m0 and m1/2 for the combination of all channels. Additional model parameters are A0 = -2m0 , tan(beta) = 30 and sign(mu) = +1.

Cross section predictions for the nGM grid. For each signal point 25000 MC events have been generated.

Observed upper cross section limits for the nGM grid. For each signal point 25000 MC events have been generated. The limit is derived for the combination of the 2tau and the tau+lepton channels.

Systematic uncertainty for the GMSB grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Acceptance for the GMSB grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Efficiency for the GMSB grid in the 1-tau analysis.

The product of acceptance and efficiency for the GMSB grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Expected CLs values for the GMSB grid in the 1tau analysis.

Observed CLs values for the GMSB grid in the 1tau analysis.

Systematic uncertainty for the mSUGRA grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Acceptance for the mSUGRA grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Efficiency for the mSUGRA grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the mSUGRA grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Expected CLs values for the mSUGRA grid in the 1tau analysis.

Observed CLs values for the mSUGRA grid in the 1tau analysis.

Systematic uncertainty for the bRPV grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Acceptance for the bRPV grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Efficiency for the bRPV grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the bRPV grid in the 1-tau analysis.

Expected CLs values for the bRPV grid in the 1tau analysis.

Observed CLs values for the bRPV grid in the 1tau analysis.

Systematic uncertainty for the GMSB grid in the 2tau analysis.

Acceptance for the GMSB grid in the 2tau analysis.

Efficiency for the GMSB grid in the 2tau analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the GMSB grid in the 2tau analysis.

Expected CLs values for the GMSB grid in the 2tau analysis.

Observed CLs values for the GMSB grid in the 2tau analysis.

Systematic uncertainty for the nGM grid in the 2tau analysis.

Acceptance for the nGM grid in the 2tau analysis.

Efficiency for the nGM grid in the 2tau analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the nGM grid in the 2tau analysis.

Expected CLs values for the nGM grid in the 2tau analysis.

Observed CLs values for the nGM grid in the 2tau analysis.

Systematic uncertainty for the bRPV grid in the 2tau analysis.

Acceptance for the bRPV grid in the 2tau analysis.

Efficiency for the bRPV grid in the 2tau analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the bRPV grid in the 2tau analysis.

Expected CLs values for the bRPV grid in the 2tau analysis.

Observed CLs values for the bRPV grid in the 2tau analysis.

Systematic Uncertainty for the GMSB grid in the tau+e analysis.

Acceptance for the GMSB grid in the tau+e analysis.

Efficiency for the GMSB grid in the tau+e analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the GMSB grid in the tau+e analysis.

Expected CLs values for the GMSB grid in the tau+e analysis.

Observed CLs values for the GMSB grid in the tau+e analysis.

Systematic Uncertainty for the nGM grid in the tau+e analysis.

Acceptance for the nGM grid in the tau+e analysis.

Efficiency for the nGM grid in the tau+e analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the nGM grid in the tau+e analysis.

Expected CLs values for the nGM grid in the tau+e analysis.

Observed CLs values for the nGM grid in the tau+e analysis.

Systematic Uncertainty for the bRPV grid in the tau+e analysis.

Acceptance for the bRPV grid in the tau+e analysis.

Efficiency for the bRPV grid in the tau+e analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the bRPV grid in the tau+e analysis.

Expected CLs values for the bRPV grid in the tau+e analysis.

Observed CLs values for the bRPV grid in the tau+e analysis.

Systematic Uncertainty for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+e analysis.

Acceptance for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+e analysis.

Efficiency for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+e analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+e analysis.

Expected CLs values for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+e analysis.

Observed CLs values for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+e analysis.

Systematic Uncertainty for the GMSB grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Acceptance for the GMSB grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Efficiency for the GMSB grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the GMSB grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Expected CLs values for the GMSB grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Observed CLs values for the GMSB grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Systematic Uncertainty for the nGM grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Acceptance for the nGM grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Efficiency for the nGM grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the nGM grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Expected CLs values for the nGM grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Observed CLs values for the nGM grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Systematic Uncertainty for the bRPV grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Acceptance for the bRPV grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Efficiency for the bRPV grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the bRPV grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Expected CLs values for the bRPV grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Observed CLs values for the bRPV grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Systematic Uncertainty for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Acceptance for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Efficiency for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Expected CLs values for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+mu analysis.

Observed CLs values for the mSUGRA grid in the tau+mu analysis.