Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dimuon channel in 1b final state for different bbll (destructive interference) signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dimuon channel in 2b final state for different bbll signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dimuon channel in 2b final state for different bbll (destructive interference) signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dielectron channel for different bbll signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dielectron channel for different bbll (destructive interference) signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dielectron channel in 1b final state for different bbll signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dielectron channel in 1b final state for different bbll (destructive interference) signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dielectron channel in 2b final state for different bbll signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dielectron channel in 2b final state for different bbll (destructive interference) signal scenarios

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dimuon channel for bsll signal

Signal efficiencies with Full Run 2 dielectron channel for bsll signal

Observed and expected background yields for different mass ranges in the dielectron channel in 0 b jet final state. The sum of all background contributions is shown as well as a breakdown into the four main categories. The quoted uncertainty includes both the statistical and the systematic components.

Observed and expected background yields for different mass ranges in the dielectron channel in 1 b jet final state. The sum of all background contributions is shown as well as a breakdown into the four main categories. The quoted uncertainty includes both the statistical and the systematic components.

Observed and expected background yields for different mass ranges in the dielectron channel in 2 b jet final state. The sum of all background contributions is shown as well as a breakdown into the four main categories. The quoted uncertainty includes both the statistical and the systematic components.

Observed and expected background yields for different mass ranges in the dimuon channel in 0 b jet final state. The sum of all background contributions is shown as well as a breakdown into the four main categories. The quoted uncertainty includes both the statistical and the systematic components.

Observed and expected background yields for different mass ranges in the dimuon channel in 1 b jet final state. The sum of all background contributions is shown as well as a breakdown into the four main categories. The quoted uncertainty includes both the statistical and the systematic components.

Observed and expected background yields for different mass ranges in the dimuon channel in 2 b jet final state. The sum of all background contributions is shown as well as a breakdown into the four main categories. The quoted uncertainty includes both the statistical and the systematic components.

Measured flavor ratio from DY+jets MC and data in 0b channel. The quoted uncertainty includes both the statistical and the systematic components. The flavor ratio from DY+jets MC deviates slightly from unity as the ratio is not corrected for mass-dependent acceptance times efficiency.

Measured flavor ratio from DY+jets MC and data in 1b+2b channel. The quoted uncertainty includes both the statistical and the systematic components. The flavor ratio from DY+jets MC deviates slightly from unity as the ratio is not corrected for mass-dependent acceptance times efficiency.

Lower limits on the energy scale ($\Lambda$) at 95% CL for bbll signal with different chirality and interference assumptions in the dielectron channel combining all b jet final states. The limits are obtained for $m_{ee}>300$ GeV.

Lower limits on the energy scale ($\Lambda$) at 95% CL for bbll signal with different chirality and interference assumptions in the dimuon channel combining all b jet final states. The limits are obtained for $m_{\mu\mu}>300$ GeV.

Lower limits on the energy scale ($\Lambda$) at 95% CL for bbll signal with different chirality and interference assumptions in the combined (dimuon+dielectron) channel combining all b jet final states. The limits are obtained for $m_{\ell\ell}>300$ GeV.

Observed and Expected upper limits on the product of the production cross section for the bsll signal in the dielectron and dimuon channels for 0 b-tagged jets.

Observed and Expected upper limits on the product of the production cross section for the bsll signal in the dielectron and dimuon channels for 1 b-tagged jets.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the 1 b jet, 0 forward jet, $t\leq 0$ signal region in the single lepton channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the 1 b jet, 0 forward jet, $t>0$ signal region in the single lepton channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the 1 b jet, $\geq 1$ forward jet, $t\leq 0$ signal region in the single lepton channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the 1 b jet, $\geq 1$ forward jet, $t>0$ signal region in the single lepton channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the $\geq 2$ b jet, $t\leq 0$ signal region in the single lepton channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the $\geq 2$ b jet, $t>0$ signal region in the single lepton channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit NN output score distribution of the $\geq 2$ b jet, different flavor signal region in the dileptonic channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit NN output score distribution of the $\geq 2$ b jet, same flavor signal region in the dileptonic channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit NN output score distribution of the 1 b jet, different flavor signal region in the dileptonic channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The post-fit NN output score distribution of the 1 b jet, same flavor signal region in the dileptonic channel. A representative signal model distribution is shown for the scalar mediator interaction with $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi})=(1,100)$GeV and couplings set to unity. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds and the chosen signal model, while in the lower panel it represents only the total uncertainty in the backgrounds.

The model-independent 95\% CL limits on production cross section for new physics processes for the scalar interaction. The expected limit is shown by the black dashed line with the 68 and 95\% CL uncertainty bands in green and yellow, respectively, while the observed limit is shown by the solid black line. Theoretical LO cross section values for the DM model and their associated uncertainties are also presented (grey line).

The model-independent 95\% CL limits on production cross section for new physics processes for the pseudoscalar interaction. The expected limit is shown by the black dashed line with the 68 and 95\% CL uncertainty bands in green and yellow, respectively, while the observed limit is shown by the solid black line. Theoretical LO cross section values for the DM model and their associated uncertainties are also presented (grey line).

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the QCD control region in the all hadronic channel. The grey dashed area in the upper and lower panels represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the tt(1l) control region in the all hadronic channel. The grey dashed area in the upper and lower panels represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the W+jets control region in the all hadronic channel. The grey dashed area in the upper and lower panels represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the Z(2l) control region in the all hadronic channel. The grey dashed area in the upper and lower panels represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the W+jets control region in the single lepton channel. The grey dashed area in the upper and lower panels represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds.

The post-fit $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ distribution of the tt(2l) control region in the single lepton channel. The grey dashed area in the upper and lower panels represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds.

The post-fit $(N_{\text{jet}},N_{\text{bjet}})$ distribution of the ttZ control region in the dileptonic channel. The grey dashed area in the upper and lower panels represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds.

The post-fit NN distribution of the Drell-Yan control region in the dileptonic channel. The grey dashed area in the upper and lower panels represents the total uncertainty in all of the backgrounds.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking periods, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,50)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the all hadronic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last three requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,500)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the all hadronic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last three requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,50)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the all hadronic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last three requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,500)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the all hadronic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last three requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,50)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the all hadronic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last three requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,500)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the all hadronic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last three requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,50)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the all hadronic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last three requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,500)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the all hadronic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last three requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T}^{b}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,50)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the single lepton channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last six requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,500)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the single lepton channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last six requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,50)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the single lepton channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last six requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,500)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the single lepton channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last six requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,50)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the single lepton channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last six requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,500)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the single lepton channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last six requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,50)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the single lepton channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last six requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,500)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the single lepton channel. The requirements listed up to and including the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last six requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the $M_{T2}^{W}$ cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,50)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the dileptonic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the Z window cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last four requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the Z window cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,500)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the dileptonic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the Z window cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last four requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the Z window cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,50)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the dileptonic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the Z window cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last four requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the Z window cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the t+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,500)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the dileptonic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the Z window cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last four requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the Z window cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,50)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the dileptonic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the Z window cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last four requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the Z window cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{\phi}) = (1,500)$ GeV scalar mediator signal hypothesis for the dileptonic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the Z window cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last four requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the Z window cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,50)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the dileptonic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the Z window cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last four requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the Z window cut.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 data-taking period, corresponding to $36.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, $41.5\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, and $59.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, respectively, after the application of each search requirement for the tt+DM $(m_{\chi},m_{a}) = (1,500)$ GeV pseudoscalar mediator signal hypothesis for the dileptonic channel. The requirements listed up to and including the Z window cut are cumulative such that only the events and objects passing a given requirement are considered in subsequent requirements. The last four requirements show the separate yields after the cumulative requirements up to the Z window cut.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the tt+DM scalar mediator signal process considering all possible decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the tt+DM pseudoscalar mediator signal process considering all possible decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the tt+DM scalar mediator signal process considering dileptonic decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the tt+DM pseudoscalar mediator signal process considering dileptonic decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the t+DM t-channel scalar mediator signal process considering all possible decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the t+DM tW-channel scalar mediator signal process considering all possible decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the t+DM t-channel pseudoscalar mediator signal process considering all possible decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the t+DM tW-channel pseudoscalar mediator signal process considering all possible decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the t+DM tW-channel scalar mediator signal process considering dileptonic decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Cross sections calculated to leading order (LO) accuracy for the t+DM tW-channel pseudoscalar mediator signal process considering dileptonic decays from the visible particles in the final state.

Example description

Differential fiducial cross sections for the number of jets

Example description

Differential fiducial cross sections for the leading jet pT

Example description

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SROS-on-b-$e\mu\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $m_{\text{T}}^{\text{min}}$ in SROS-on-b-$e\mu\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SRSS-$2\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Observed ($N_{\text{obs}}$) and expected ($N_{\text{exp}}$) yields after the background-only fit for the flavor-merged inclusive SRs. The third and fourth columns list the 95\% CL upper limits on the visible cross-section ($\sigma_{\text{vis}}^{95}$) and on the number of signal events ($S_\text{obs}^{95}$). The fifth column ($S_\text{exp}^{95}$) shows the 95\% CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number of background events and its $\pm 1\sigma$ variations. The last two columns indicate the CL$_{\text{b}}$ value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery $p$-value ($p(s = 0)$) with its associated statistical significance $Z$. If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the $p$-value is capped at 0.5.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SROS-off-b-$e\mu\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. Ratio values outside the graph range are indicated by brown arrows. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $m_{\text{T}}^{\text{min}}$ in SROS-off-b-$e\mu\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. Ratio values outside the graph range are indicated by brown arrows. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SRSS-$eee$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. Ratio values outside the graph range are indicated by brown arrows. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SRSS-$ee\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. Ratio values outside the graph range are indicated by brown arrows. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

The expected upper limits on the cross-section for each signal point. The gray numbers represent the values. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid. An asymptotic approximation is employed in the CL$_{\text{s}}$ calculation instead of the full calculation using pseudo-experiments.

The observed upper limits on the cross-section for each signal point. The gray numbers represent the values. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid. An asymptotic approximation is employed in the CL$_{\text{s}}$ calculation instead of the full calculation using pseudo-experiments.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Summary of the number of events passing each selection for the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}^0_3,\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=(300, 200, 100)$, $(550, 300, 100)$, $(450, 180, 100)$ GeV signal points, including all production processes. After the initial selections, the table is split into row blocks per inclusive region, and then further for each SR channel. Flavor-binned SRs are shown for SROS-on-b for reference. The generator level selections require to have two or more leptons.

Summary of the number of events passing each selection for the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}^0_3,\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=(300, 200, 100)$, $(550, 300, 100)$, $(450, 180, 100)$ GeV signal points, including all production processes. After the initial selections, the table is split into row blocks per inclusive region, and then further for each SR channel. Flavor-binned SRs are shown for SROS-off-b for reference. The generator level selections require to have two or more leptons.

Summary of the number of events passing each selection for the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}^0_3,\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=(300, 200, 100)$, $(550, 300, 100)$, $(450, 180, 100)$ GeV signal points, including all production processes. After the initial selections, the table is split into row blocks per inclusive region, and then further for each SR channel. Flavor-binned SRs are shown. The generator level selections require to have two or more leptons.

Comparison of the shapes extrapolated with a linear or quadratic extrapolation of the QCD contribution in the W+ signal region.

Comparison of the shapes extrapolated with a linear or quadratic extrapolation of the QCD contribution in the W- signal region.

Post-fit distributions of the transverse mass in the W+ signal region.

Post-fit distributions of the transverse mass in the W- signal region.

Post-fit distributions of the dimuon mass in the Z boson signal region.

Example plot for the extrapolation of the QCD contribution from a region with inverted relative isolation criterion to the W+ signal region in the transverse mass bin 12 < mT < 18 GeV. The values corresponding to the smallest relative muon isolation are extrapolated with a linear (smaller value) and quadratic (larger value) function.

Example plot for the extrapolation of the QCD contribution from a region with inverted relative isolation criterion to the W- signal region in the transverse mass bin 12 < mT < 18 GeV.The values corresponding to the smallest relative muon isolation are extrapolated with a linear (smaller value) and quadratic (larger value) function.

Example plot for the extrapolation of the QCD contribution from a region with inverted relative isolation criterion to the W+ signal region in the transverse mass bin 102 < mT < 108 GeV.The values corresponding to the smallest relative muon isolation are extrapolated with a linear (larger value) and quadratic (smaller value) function.

Example plot for the extrapolation of the QCD contribution from a region with inverted relative isolation criterion to the W- signal region in the transverse mass bin 102 < mT < 108 GeV.The values corresponding to the smallest relative muon isolation are extrapolated with a linear (smaller value) and quadratic (larger value) function.

The table compares theoretical and measured values of the product of the fiducial cross sections and branching fractions. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with three different PDF sets. All values are normalized to the corresponding measured value. The relative uncertainties on the measured values are given separately with and without the contribution from the luminosity uncertainty.

The table compares theoretical and measured values of the product of the total cross sections and branching fractions. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with three different PDF sets. All values are normalized to the corresponding measured value. The relative uncertainties on the measured values are given separately with and without the contribution from the luminosity uncertainty.

The table compares theoretical and measured ratios of the product of the fiducial cross sections and branching fractions. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with three different PDF sets. All values are normalized to the corresponding measured value.

The table compares theoretical and measured ratios of the product of the total cross sections and branching fractions. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with three different PDF sets. All values are normalized to the corresponding measured value.

Comparison of the measured and theoretical cross sections for Z, W+, W-, and W production at different center-of-mass energies. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with the NNPDF 3.1 PDF set.

The Charged-hadron yields as a function of pT in different y selections in p+Pb collisions.

The K^{0}_{S} yields as a function of pT in different y selections in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The #Lambda yields as a function of pT in different y selections in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The #Xi^{-} yields as a function of pT in different y selections in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The K^{0}_{S} yields as a function of pT in different y selections in p+Pb collisions.

The #Lambda yields as a function of pT in different y selections in p+Pb collisions.

The #Xi^{-} yields as a function of pT in different y selections in p+Pb collisions.

The Charged-hadron and identified-hadron yields as a function of y in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The Charged-hadron and identified-hadron yields as a function of y in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The Charged-hadron and identified-hadron yields as a function of y in p+Pb collisions.

The Charged-hadron and identified-hadron yields as a function of y in p+Pb collisions.

The meanpT of charged hadrons and identified hadrons as a function of Nchrec in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The meanpT of charged hadrons and identified hadrons as a function of Nchrec in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The meanpT of charged hadrons and identified hadrons as a function of Nchrec in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The meanpT of charged hadrons and identified hadrons as a function of Nchrec in p+Pb collisions.

The meanpT of charged hadrons and identified hadrons as a function of Nchrec in p+Pb collisions.

The baryon to meson ratio as a function of pT in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The baryon to meson ratio as a function of pT in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The baryon to meson ratio as a function of pT in p+Pb collisions.

The baryon to meson ratio as a function of pT in p+Pb collisions.

The ratios of identified-strange-hadron yield to charged-hadron yields as a function of Nchrec in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The ratios of identified-strange-hadron yield to charged-hadron yields as a function of Nchrec in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The ratios of identified-strange-hadron yield to charged-hadron yields as a function of Nchrec in Pb+Pb photo-nuclear collisions.

The ratios of identified-strange-hadron yield to charged-hadron yields as a function of Nchrec in p+Pb collisions.

The ratios of identified-strange-hadron yield to charged-hadron yields as a function of Nchrec in p+Pb collisions.

The unfolded jet axis decorrelation distribution,$\frac{1}{N} \frac{dN}{d\Delta j}$, as a function of $\Delta j$ for the $0-10\%$, $10-30\%$, $30-50\%$, and $50-80\%$ centrality bins in the $230 < p_{\mathrm{T}} < 300$ GeV interval.

The second-order Fourier sine coefficients of $\Lambda$ polarization along the beam direction as functions of $N_\mathrm{trk}^\mathrm{offline}$ in pPb collisions at 8.16 TeV extracted with HF based event planes. The HF-based event plane is reconstructed only with the HF detectors toward the Pb going direction.

The second-order Fourier sine coefficients of $\bar{\Lambda}$ polarization along the beam direction as functions of $N_\mathrm{trk}^\mathrm{offline}$ in pPb collisions at 8.16 TeV extracted with HF based event planes. The HF-based event plane is reconstructed only with the HF detectors toward the Pb going direction.

The second-order Fourier sine coefficients of $\Lambda+\bar{\Lambda}$ polarization along the beam direction as functions of $N_\mathrm{trk}^\mathrm{offline}$ in pPb collisions at 8.16 TeV extracted with HF based event planes. The HF-based event plane is reconstructed only with the HF detectors toward the Pb going direction.

Expected and observed upper limits for the b-quark-associated Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction of the decay into a b quark pair at 95% CL as functions of $m_\phi$ for the 2018 FH category. The vertical dashed lines indicate the boundaries of usage of the different fit ranges, as reflected in the rightmost column of Table 2.

Expected and observed upper limits for the b-quark-associated Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction of the decay into a b quark pair at 95% CL as functions of $m_\phi$, corresponding to the Run 2 combination. The vertical dashed line separates the mass range where only the 2017 SL category contributes on its left, from the region where also the 2017 FH and 2018 FH categories contribute on its right. The expected limits from the 2017 SL, 2017 FH, and 2018 FH datasets as well as from the previously published result based on the 2016 dataset are also shown as colored lines.

Interpretation in the $M_h^{125}$ scenario of the MSSM: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of the mass of the CP-odd boson, $m_{A}$. The higgsino mass parameter has been set to $\mu = +1$ TeV. The hashed area indicates the parameter region in which the mass of the lightest MSSM Higgs boson does not coincide with 125 GeV within a margin of 3 GeV.

Interpretation in the $M_h^{125}$ scenario of the MSSM: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of the mass of the CP-odd boson, $m_{A}$. The higgsino mass parameter has been set to $\mu = -1$ TeV. The hashed area indicates the parameter region in which the mass of the lightest MSSM Higgs boson does not coincide with 125 GeV within a margin of 3 GeV.

Interpretation in the $M_h^{125}$ scenario of the MSSM: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of the mass of the CP-odd boson, $m_{A}$. The higgsino mass parameter has been set to $\mu = -2$ TeV. The hashed area indicates the parameter region in which the mass of the lightest MSSM Higgs boson does not coincide with 125 GeV within a margin of 3 GeV.

Interpretation in the $M_h^{125}$ scenario of the MSSM: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of the mass of the CP-odd boson, $m_{A}$. The higgsino mass parameter has been set to $\mu = -3$ TeV. The hashed area indicates the parameter region in which the mass of the lightest MSSM Higgs boson does not coincide with 125 GeV within a margin of 3 GeV.

Interpretation in the $m_h^{mod+}$ scenario of the MSSM: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of the mass of the CP-odd boson, $m_{A}$. The hashed area indicates the parameter region in which the mass of the lightest MSSM Higgs boson does not coincide with 125 GeV within a margin of 3 GeV.

Interpretation in the hMSSM scenario of the MSSM: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of the mass of the CP-odd boson, $m_{A}$.

Interpretation in 2HDM scenarios: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as a function of $m_{A}$ for cos(beta-alpha) = 0.1, for the 2HDM $\it Type-II$ scenario.

Interpretation in 2HDM scenarios: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of cos(beta-alpha) for masses of $m_{A} = m_{H} = 300$ GeV, for the 2HDM $\it Type-II$ scenario.

Interpretation in 2HDM scenarios: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as a function of $m_{A}$ for cos(beta-alpha) = 0.1, for the 2HDM $\it Flipped$ scenario.

Interpretation in 2HDM scenarios: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of cos(beta-alpha) for masses of $m_{A} = m_{H} = 300$ GeV, for the 2HDM $\it Flipped$ scenario.

Interpretation in the 2HDM flipped scenario: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of cos(beta-alpha) for mass of $m_{A} = m_{H} = 140$ GeV.

Interpretation in the 2HDM flipped scenario: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of cos(beta-alpha) for mass of $m_{A} = m_{H} = 600$ GeV.

Interpretation in the 2HDM flipped scenario: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of cos(beta-alpha) for mass of $m_{A} = m_{H} = 900$ GeV.

Interpretation in the 2HDM flipped scenario: observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the parameter tan(beta) as functions of cos(beta-alpha) for mass of $m_{A} = m_{H} = 1200$ GeV.

Simulated signal shapes for three representative values of the Higgs boson mass $m_\phi$ in the 2017 SL channel.

Simulated signal shapes for three representative values of the Higgs boson mass $m_\phi$ in the 2017 FH channel.

Simulated signal shapes for three representative values of the Higgs boson mass $m_\phi$ in the 2018 FH channel.

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2017 analysis in the SL category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2017 analysis in the SL category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2017 analysis in the SL category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2017 analysis in the FH category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2017 analysis in the FH category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2017 analysis in the FH category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2017 analysis in the FH category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2018 analysis in the FH category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2018 analysis in the FH category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2018 analysis in the FH category

Background-only fits to the M12 distribution in each fit range of the 2018 analysis in the FH category