$\Upsilon$(nS) polarization parameter $\tilde\lambda$ in the HX frame for $p_T$ of 10 to 15 GeV. The global uncertainties, independent of state and $N_{ch}$ bin, are also indicated.

$\Upsilon$(nS) polarization parameter $\lambda_\vartheta$ in the HX frame for $p_T$ of 15 to 35 GeV. The global uncertainties, independent of state and $N_{ch}$ bin, are also indicated.

$\Upsilon$(nS) polarization parameter $\lambda_\varphi$ in the HX frame for $p_T$ of 15 to 35 GeV. The global uncertainties, independent of state and $N_{ch}$ bin, are also indicated.

$\Upsilon$(nS) polarization parameter $\lambda_{\vartheta\varphi}$ in the HX frame for $p_T$ of 15 to 35 GeV. The global uncertainties, independent of state and $N_{ch}$ bin, are also indicated.

$\Upsilon$(nS) polarization parameter $\tilde\lambda$ in the HX frame for $p_T$ of 15 to 35 GeV. The global uncertainties, independent of state and $N_{ch}$ bin, are also indicated.

Negative log-likelihood contours corresponding to 68% and 95% CL in the ($\kappa_{V}$, $\kappa_{F}$) plane obtained from a combined fit, assuming no contributions from invisible or undetected non-SM Higgs boson decays.

Reduced coupling strength modifiers $\kappa_{F}\cdot m_{F}/\text{vev}$ for fermions ($F=t,\,b,\,\tau,\,\mu$) and $\sqrt{\kappa_{V}}\cdot m_{V}/\text{vev}$ for vector bosons as a function of their masses $m_{F}$ and $m_{V}$ with vev = 246 GeV. Fit scenario with $\kappa_{c}=\kappa_{t}$ (coloured circle markers) is shown. Loop-induced processes are assumed to have the SM structure, and Higgs boson decays to non-SM particles are not allowed. The $p$-value for compatibility of the combined measurement and the SM prediction is 56%. The lower panel shows the values of the coupling strength modifiers.

Reduced coupling strength modifiers $\kappa_{F}\cdot m_{F}/\text{vev}$ for fermions ($F=t,\,b,\,\tau,\,\mu$) and $\sqrt{\kappa_{V}}\cdot m_{V}/\text{vev}$ for vector bosons as a function of their masses $m_{F}$ and $m_{V}$ with vev = 246 GeV. Fit scenario with $\kappa_{c}$ left free-floating (grey cross markers) is shown. Loop-induced processes are assumed to have the SM structure, and Higgs boson decays to non-SM particles are not allowed. The $p$-value for compatibility of the combined measurement and the SM prediction is 65%. The lower panel shows the values of the coupling strength modifiers. The grey arrow points in the direction of the best-fit value and the grey uncertainty bar extends beyond the lower panel range.

Reduced coupling strength modifiers and their uncertainties per particle type with effective photon, $Z\gamma$ and gluon couplings. The scenario where $B_{inv.}=B_{u.}=0$ is assumed is shown as solid lines. The $p$-value for compatibility with the SM prediction is 61% in this case. The scenario where $B_{inv.}$ and $B_{u.}$ are allowed to contribute to the total Higgs boson decay width while assuming that $\kappa_{V}\le1$ and $B_{u.}\ge0$ is shown as dashed lines.

Reduced coupling strength modifiers and their uncertainties per particle type with effective photon, $Z\gamma$ and gluon couplings. The scenario where $B_{inv.}$ and $B_{u.}$ are allowed to contribute to the total Higgs boson decay width while assuming that $\kappa_{V}\le1$ and $B_{u.}\ge0$ is shown as dashed lines. The lower panel shows the 95% CL upper limits on $B_{inv.}$ and $B_{u.}$.

Observed and predicted Higgs boson production cross sections in different kinematic regions. The $p$-value for compatibility of the combined measurement and the SM prediction is 94%. Kinematic regions are defined separately for each production process, based on the jet multiplicity, the transverse momentum of the Higgs ($p_{T}^{H}$) and vector bosons ($p_{T}^{W}$ and $p_{T}^{Z}$) and the two-jet invariant mass ($m_{jj}$). The VH-enriched and VBF-enriched regions with the respective requirements of $m_{jj}\in[60, 120)$ GeV and $m_{jj}\notin[60, 120)$ GeV are enhanced in signal events from $VH$ and VBF productions, respectively.

Observed variations of −2 ln $\Lambda(\mu)$ as a function of $\mu$ with all systematic uncertainties included.

Observed variations of −2 ln $\Lambda(\mu)$ as a function of $\mu$ with with parameters describing theory uncertainties in background processes fixed to their best-fit values.

Observed variations of −2 ln $\Lambda(\mu)$ as a function of $\mu$ with parameters describing theory uncertainties in background and signal processes fixed to their best-fit values.

Observed variations of −2 ln $\Lambda(\mu)$ as a function of $\mu$ with all systematic uncertainties fixed to their best-fit values.

Cross sections for ggF, VBF, $WH$, $ZH$, $t\bar{t}H$ and $tH$ production modes. The cross sections are normalized to their SM predictions, measured assuming SM values for the decay branching fractions. The black error bars, blue boxes and yellow boxes show the total, systematic, and statistical uncertainties in the measurements, respectively. The gray bands indicate the theory uncertainties on the SM cross section predictions. The level of compatibility between the measurement and the SM prediction corresponds to a $p$-value of $p_{SM}=65\%$.

Correlation matrix from the measurement of ggF, VBF, $WH$, $ZH$, $ttH$ and $tH$ production cross sections without theory uncertainties.

Correlation matrix from the measurement of ggF, VBF, $WH$, $ZH$, $ttH$ and $tH$ production cross sections with the theory uncertainties.

Cross sections for ggF, VBF, $WH$, $ZH$, $t\bar{t}H+tH$ production modes, obtained without including the theory uncertainties on the predicted SM cross sections in the fit. The cross sections are normalized to their SM predictions, measured assuming SM values for the decay branching fractions. The black error bars, blue boxes and yellow boxes show the total, systematic, and statistical uncertainties in the measurements, respectively. The gray bands indicate the theory uncertainties on the SM cross section predictions. The level of compatibility between the measurement and the SM prediction corresponds to a $p$-value of $p_{SM}=89\%$.

Correlation matrix from the measurement of ggF, VBF, $WH$, $ZH$, $ttH+tH$ production cross sections without theory uncertainties.

Correlation matrix from the measurement of the branching fractions, assuming SM values for the decay production cross sections and no contributions from non-SM decays to the total Higgs boson decay width.

Correlation matrix from the measured values of the production cross sections times branching fractions of the Higgs boson, for the combinations in which sufficient sensitivity is provided by the input analyses.

Observed correlation matrix from the fit of $\kappa_{V}$ and $\kappa_{F}$ coupling modifiers. No contributions from non-SM invisible and undetected Higgs boson decays are allowed, i.e. $B_{inv.}=B_{u.}=0$.

Negative log-likelihood contour corresponding to 68% CL in the ($\kappa_{V}$, $\kappa_{F}$) plane, corresponding to $H\to\gamma\gamma$ decay, obtained from a combined fit, assuming no contributions from invisible or undetected non-SM Higgs boson decays.

Negative log-likelihood contour corresponding to 68% CL in the ($\kappa_{V}$, $\kappa_{F}$) plane, corresponding to $H\to ZZ$ decay, obtained from a combined fit, assuming no contributions from invisible or undetected non-SM Higgs boson decays.

Negative log-likelihood contour corresponding to 68% CL in the ($\kappa_{V}$, $\kappa_{F}$) plane, corresponding to $H\to\tau\tau$ decay, obtained from a combined fit, assuming no contributions from invisible or undetected non-SM Higgs boson decays.

Negative log-likelihood contour corresponding to 68% CL in the ($\kappa_{V}$, $\kappa_{F}$) plane, corresponding to $H\to WW$ decay, obtained from a combined fit, assuming no contributions from invisible or undetected non-SM Higgs boson decays.

Negative log-likelihood contour corresponding to 68% CL in the ($\kappa_{V}$, $\kappa_{F}$) plane, corresponding to $H\to bb$ decay, obtained from a combined fit, assuming no contributions from invisible or undetected non-SM Higgs boson decays.

Observed correlation matrix from the fit of $\kappa_{Z}$, $\kappa_{W}$, $\kappa_{b}$, $\kappa_{t}$, $\kappa_{\tau}$ and $\kappa_{\mu}$ coupling modifiers with $\kappa_{c}$ = $\kappa_{t}$ in the fit. All fitted parameters are assumed to be positive. No contributions from non-SM invisible and undetected Higgs boson decays are allowed, i.e. $B_{inv.}=B_{u.}=0$.

Observed correlation matrix from the fit of the $\kappa_{Z}$, $\kappa_{W}$, $\kappa_{b}$, $\kappa_{t}$, $\kappa_{\tau}$, $\kappa_{\mu}$ and effective photon, $Z \gamma$ and gluon coupling modifiers. No contributions from non-SM invisible and undetected Higgs boson decays are allowed, i.e. $B_{inv.}=B_{u.}=0$.

Coupling-strength modifiers and their uncertainties for the effective photon, $Z\gamma$ and gluon couplings as free parameters and all other coupling modifiers set to unity. The scenario where $B_{inv.}=B_{u.}=0$ is assumed is shown as solid lines. The $p$-value of the compatibility with the SM prediction is 63% in this case. The scenario where $B_{inv.}$ and $B_{u.}$ are allowed to contribute to the total Higgs width is shown as dashed lines, with the corresponding $p$-value of 49%. Both $B_{inv.}$ and $B_{u.}$ are allowed to take negative values in the latter case.

Coupling-strength modifiers and their uncertainties for the effective photon, $Z\gamma$ and gluon couplings as free parameters and all other coupling modifiers set to unity. The scenario where $B_{inv.}$ and $B_{u.}$ are allowed to contribute to the total Higgs width is shown as dashed lines, with the corresponding $p$-value of 49%. Both $B_{inv.}$ and $B_{u.}$ are allowed to take negative values. The lower pad shows the 95% CL upper limits on $B_{inv.}$ and $B_{u.}$.

Negative log-likelihood contours corresponding to 68% and 95% CL in the ($\kappa_{g}$, $\kappa_{\gamma}$) plane obtained from a combined fit of ($\kappa_{g}$, $\kappa_{\gamma}$ and $\kappa_{Z\gamma}$) .

Measured ratios of coupling modifiers. The red line indicates the SM value of unity for each parameter. The level of compatibility between the combined measurement and the SM prediction corresponds to a $p$-value of 71% with ten degrees of freedom.

Best-fit values and uncertainties for the cross sections in each measurement region, normalized to the SM predictions for the various parameters. The measurements assume SM branching fractions for all measured decays. The black error bars, blue boxes and yellow boxes show the total, systematic, and statistical uncertainties in the measurements, respectively. The gray bands show the theory uncertainties on the predictions. The level of compatibility between the combined measurement and the SM prediction corresponds to a $p$-value of 94%.

Correlation matrix for the measured values of the simplified template cross sections.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{Z}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{Z}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{W}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{W}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{t}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{t}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{b}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{b}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{\tau}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{\tau}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{\mu}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{\mu}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{g}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{g}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{\gamma}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{\gamma}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{Z\gamma}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $\kappa_{Z\gamma}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $B_{inv.}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $B_{inv.}$.

Expected negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $B_{u.}$.

Observed negative log-likelihood scans as a function of $B_{u.}$.

The acceptances of STXS stage 1.2 kinematic regions in the Higgs boson production processes.

Distribution of exclusive jet multiplicity.

Distribution of pT (leading jet) [GeV] with at least one jet in the event.

Distribution of pT (leading jet) [GeV] with exactly one jet in the event.

Distribution of pT (leading jet) [GeV] with at least two jets in the event.

Distribution of pT (leading jet) [GeV] with at least three jets in the event.

Distribution of pT (2nd jet) [GeV] with at least two jets in the event.

Distribution of pT (3rd jet) [GeV] with at least three jets in the event.

Distribution of ST [GeV] with at least two jets in the event.

Distribution of ST [GeV] with exactly two jets in the event.

Distribution of ST [GeV] with at least three jets in the event.

Distribution of ST [GeV] with exactly three jets in the event.

Distribution of DR(jj) [GeV] with at least two jets in the event.

Distribution of DPhi(jj) [GeV] with at least two jets in the event.

Distribution of m(jj) [GeV] with at least two jets in the event.

Distribution of leading jet rapidity with at least one jet in the event.

Distribution of 2nd jet rapidity with at least two jets in the event.

Distribution of 3rd jet rapidity with at least three jets in the event.

Measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for 1.2 < |y| < 1.6.

Measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for 1.6 < |y| < 2.0.

Measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for 2.0 < |y| < 2.4.

Measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for 2.4 < |y| < 2.8.

Measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for 2.8 < |y| < 3.2.

Measured cross sections in full-lepton phase space as a function of |y|.

Normalised measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for |y| < 1.6.

The $1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ variation of the expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=1.0$.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.1$.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.1$.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.15$.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.15$.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.2$.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.2$.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.4$.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.4$.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0.6$.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=0p6$.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=1.5$.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the smuon and neutralino masses, for $\lambda_{231}^{'}=1.5$.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the leptoquark mass and coupling strength.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the leptoquark mass and coupling strength.

The minus $1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ variation of the observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the leptoquark mass and coupling strength.

The plus $1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ variation of the observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the leptoquark mass and coupling strength.

The $1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ variation of the expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the leptoquark mass and coupling strength.

Observed yields, and fake lepton background yields in the $e^{+}\mu^{-}$ and $e^{-}\mu^{+}$ channels of SR-MET, along with the results of the $e^{+}\mu^{-}/e^{-}\mu^{+}$ ratio measurement and 1-sided p-value in SR-MET, binned in $M_{T2}$.

Observed yields, and fake lepton background yields in the $e^{+}\mu^{-}$ and $e^{-}\mu^{+}$ channels of SR-JET, along with the results of the $e^{+}\mu^{-}/e^{-}\mu^{+}$ ratio measurement and 1-sided p-value in SR-JET, binned in $H_{\text{P}}$.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the total number of signal events entering the $e^{+}\mu^{-}$ and $e^{-}\mu^{+}$ channels of each bin of SR-MET. The regions are binned in the same way as the ratio $\rho$ measurement. The limits are shown for a selection of 'z' values, where 'z' is the fraction of the total signal events entering the $e^{+}\mu^{-}$ channel.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the total number of signal events entering the $e^{+}\mu^{-}$ and $e^{-}\mu^{+}$ channels of each bin of SR-JET. The regions are binned in the same way as the ratio $\rho$ measurement. The limits are shown for a selection of 'z' values, where 'z' is the fraction of the total signal events entering the $e^{+}\mu^{-}$ channel.

Signal yields following each cut in the analysis, for representative $R$-parity-violating supersymmetry and leptoquark signals. All yields are MC generator-weighted and normalised to $139~\text{fb}^{-1}$. The cut labelled `Preselection' includes trigger requirements, and requires exactly one Baseline electron and one Baseline muon. At this point, the muon charge-bias correction weights are also applied. The $R$-parity-violating supersymmetry models were generated by specifying a top-quark in the final state and applying a two-lepton filter, hence the first row also includes events where the top quark decays to an electron.

Expected 95% CL upper limits with 1-sigma uncertainty on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 300 GeV.

Expected 95% CL upper limits with 2-sigma uncertainty on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 300 GeV.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 300 GeV.

Expected 95% CL upper limits on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 600 GeV.

Expected 95% CL upper limits with 1-sigma uncertainty on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 600 GeV.

Expected 95% CL upper limits with 2-sigma uncertainty on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 600 GeV.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 600 GeV.

Expected 95% CL upper limits on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 900 GeV.

Expected 95% CL upper limits with 1-sigma uncertainty on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 900 GeV.

Expected 95% CL upper limits with 2-sigma uncertainty on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 900 GeV.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 900 GeV.

Observed (black solid curve) and expected (black dashed curve) 95% CL upper limits on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of its mass with ( fW, fWW) fixed at (0, 6200). The green (inner) and yellow (outer) bands represent 1 and 2 sigma uncertainty in the expected limits. Theoretical predictions (red solid curve) as functions of the heavy Higgs boson mass are overlaid.

Observed (black solid curve) and expected (black dashed curve) 95% CL upper limits on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of its mass with ( fW, fWW) fixed at (1350, 0). The green (inner) and yellow (outer) bands represent 1 and 2 sigma uncertainty in the expected limits. Theoretical predictions (red solid curve) as functions of the heavy Higgs boson mass are overlaid.

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

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

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

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

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

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

A summary of benchmark simplified models, the most sensitive $n_{\mathrm{jet}}$ categories, and representative values for the corresponding experimental acceptance times efficiency ($\mathcal{A}\varepsilon$), the dominant systematic uncertainties, the theoretical production cross section ($\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}$), and the expected and observed upper limits on the production cross section, expressed in terms of the signal strength parameter ($\mu$).

Summary of the mass limits obtained for the fourteen classes of simplified models. The limits indicate the strongest observed and expected (in parentheses) mass exclusions in $\tilde{g}$, $\tilde{q}$, $\tilde{b}$, $\tilde{t}$, and $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$. The quoted values have uncertainties of $\pm 25$ and $\pm 10$ GeV for models involving the pair production of, respectively, gluinos and squarks.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1qqqq model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1qqqq model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Covariance matrix for the SM background estimates obtained using the simplified binning scheme, determined from a simultaneous fit to data in the control regions only (CR-only fit). The uncertainties in the background estimates are correlated in such a way that the covariance is typically positive. Small positive values, as well as the few negative values, are not shown.

Correlation matrix for the SM background estimates obtained using the simplified binning scheme, determined from a simultaneous fit to data in the control regions only (CR-only fit).

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{q} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2qq model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Observed data counts and "post-fit" background expectations based on the result of a combined fit to the signal region and multiple control regions under the SM-only hypothesis for the "monojet" event category. The rows labelled SM "pre-fit' show the background expectations when excluding the signal region from the fit. The uncertainties include statistical as well as systematic contributions.

Observed data counts and "post-fit" background expectations based on the result of a combined fit to the signal region and multiple control regions under the SM-only hypothesis for the "asymmetric" event categories. The rows labelled SM "pre-fit" show the background expectations when excluding the signal region from the fit. The uncertainties include statistical as well as systematic contributions.

Observed data counts and "post-fit" background expectations based on the result of a combined fit to the signal region and multiple control regions under the SM-only hypothesis for the "symmetric" event categories. The rows labelled SM "pre-fit" show the background expectations when excluding the signal region from the fit. The uncertainties include statistical as well as systematic contributions.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{q} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2qq model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Summary of a simplified binning scheme comprising $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ shapes for eight representative event topologies, defined in terms of requirements on $n_{\mathrm{jet}}$ both symmetric and asymmetric categories) and $n_{\mathrm{b}}$. For each topology, event yields are integrated over the full $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ range, $H_{\mathrm{T}} > 200$ GeV, and are categorised according to eight bins in $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ -- $130 < H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} < 200$ GeV, six bins 100 GeV wide in the region $200 < H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} < 800$ GeV, and an open final bin, $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 800$ GeV. This categorisation scheme leads to 64 bins that are exclusive, contiguous, and provide complete coverage of the signal region. The corresponding SM background estimates for these 64 bins are obtained using the nominal likelihood model. The $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ template for each topology is determined from simulation and the normalisation for each template is given by an aggregate of estimates from several ($n_{\mathrm{jet}}$, $n_{\mathrm{b}}$, $H_{\mathrm{T}}$) bins, defined according to the nominal binning scheme.

Observed data yields and "CR-only fit" SM background expectations using the simplified binning scheme, as a function of topology and $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. The SM backgrounds are determined from a simultaneous fit to data in the control regions. The data yields in the signal region are masked and excluded from the fit. The uncertainties include statistical as well as systematic contributions.

Expected ($\mu_{\mathrm{exp}}$) and observed ($\mu_{\mathrm{obs}}$) upper limits on the production cross section, expressed in terms of the signal strength parameter, obtained using both the nominal and simplified binning schema. Comparable values are obtained from the two schema for these benchmark SUSY models because the signal events typically populate bins at high values of $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ and so are at or near the limit of the search sensitivity. Larger differences in $\mu$ can be observed for models that populate the core of these distributions.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1bbbb model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1bbbb model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1tttt model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1tttt model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1ttbb model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1qqqq model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1ttbb model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1qqqq model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1qqqq model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5tttt_DM175 model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1qqqq model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{q} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2qq model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{q} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2qq model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5tttt_DM175 model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{q} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2qq model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{q} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2qq model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1bbbb model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5ttcc model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1bbbb model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1bbbb model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1bbbb model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5ttcc model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1tttt model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1tttt model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1tttt model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ b } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bb model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1tttt model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1ttbb model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1ttbb model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ b } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bb model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1ttbb model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T1ttbb model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5tttt_DM175 model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tb model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5tttt_DM175 model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5tttt_DM175 model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5tttt_DM175 model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tb model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5ttcc model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5ttcc model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5ttcc model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{g} } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T5ttcc model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ b } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bb model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ b } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bb model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ b } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bb model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ b } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bb model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tb model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2cc model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tb model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tb model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tb model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2cc model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt_degen model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2cc model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2cc model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt_degen model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2cc model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2cc model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt_degen model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2_mixed model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt_degen model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt_degen model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2tt_degen model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2_mixed model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2_mixed model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2_mixed model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2_mixed model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bW model. This line is the expected exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2_mixed model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bW model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bW model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ expected exclusion due to experimental uncertainties.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bW model. This line is the observed exclusion.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bW model. This line is the $+1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Upper limit on the cross section in the $(m_{ \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }, m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })$ plane for the T2bW model. This line is the $-1\sigma $ observed exclusion due to theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading photon category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading electron category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading muon category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading small-R jet category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading bjet category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading large-R jet category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading photon category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading electron category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading muon category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the inclusive category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the inclusive category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading small-R jet category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading bjet category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading large-R jet category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading photon category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading electron category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading muon category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading small-R jet category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading bjet category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading large-R jet category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading photon category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading electron category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the leading muon category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the inclusive category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3% as a function of mass in the inclusive category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading small-R jet category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading bjet category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading large-R jet category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading photon category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading electron category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading muon category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading small-R jet category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading bjet category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading large-R jet category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading photon category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading electron category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the leading muon category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the inclusive category

Comparison of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction times acceptance for a Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values as a function of mass in the inclusive category

Acceptance times efficiency in an HVT model as a function of mass in the leading large-R jet category

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times the branching fraction($W^{\prime} \to ZW$) for the HVT signal as functions of mass($m_{ZX}$) in the leading large-R jet category.The full(dashed) red curves correspond to the theoretical predictions of HVT model A(B)

Comparison of the identification efficiencies using standard and merged-ee reconstruction as a function of true PT(Z)

Background rejection factor as a function of signal efficiency. The red curve shows the BDT performance whereas the blue curve corresponds to that of a cut-based analysis relying only on the jet energyfraction deposited in the EM calorimeter

BH p-values of the 100 pseudo-experiments as a function of in the leading small-R jet category for an injected Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3%. The fractions of the pseudo-experiments that have the correctly identified interval and BH p-values below the threshold of 0.01 are indicated. The background is derived by the background-only fit in the full fitting range.

BH p-values of the 100 pseudo-experiments as a function of in the leading small-R jet category for an injected Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width value of 3%. The fractions of the pseudo-experiments that have the correctly identified interval and BH p-values below the threshold of 0.01 are indicated. The background is derived by the background-only fit in the range excluding the BH interval.

Fractions of pseudo-experiments in which the detected BH interval agrees with the injected mass point and the BH p-value is below 0.01 as a function of mass in the leading small-R jet category for Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width of 3%.

Fractions of pseudo-experiments in which the detected BH interval agrees with the injected mass point and the BH p-value is below 0.01 as a function of mass in the leading small-R jet category for Gaussian-shaped signal with a relative width of 3%.

Distribution of exclusion upper limits on signal event yields at 95% CL from 1000 pseudo-experiments for Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values of 3% at the low boundary of the limit-sensitive mass range for the ZX spectrum of the leading small-R jet category. The vertical line corresponds to the expected nominal exclusion limit at 95% CL.

Distribution of exclusion upper limits on signal event yields at 95% CL from 1000 pseudo-experiments for Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values of 3% at the high boundary of the limit-sensitive mass range for the ZX spectrum of the leading small-R jet category. The vertical line corresponds to the expected nominal exclusion limit at 95% CL.

Distribution of exclusion upper limits on signal event yields at 95% CL from 1000 pseudo-experiments for Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values of 5% at the low boundary of the limit-sensitive mass range for the ZX spectrum of the leading small-R jet category. The vertical line corresponds to the expected nominal exclusion limit at 95% CL.

Distribution of exclusion upper limits on signal event yields at 95% CL from 1000 pseudo-experiments for Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values of 5% at the high boundary of the limit-sensitive mass range for the ZX spectrum of the leading small-R jet category. The vertical line corresponds to the expected nominal exclusion limit at 95% CL.

Distribution of exclusion upper limits on signal event yields at 95% CL from 1000 pseudo-experiments for Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values of 10% at the low boundary of the limit-sensitive mass range for the ZX spectrum of the leading small-R jet category. The vertical line corresponds to the expected nominal exclusion limit at 95% CL.

Distribution of exclusion upper limits on signal event yields at 95% CL from 1000 pseudo-experiments for Gaussian-shaped signals with relative width values of 10% at the high boundary of the limit-sensitive mass range for the ZX spectrum of the leading small-R jet category. The vertical line corresponds to the expected nominal exclusion limit at 95% CL.

Data yields of the six event categories in the $Z\to e^+e^-$ and $\mu^+\mu^-$ decay channels. The merged-$e^+e^-$ events are included in the $e^+e^-$ channel, increasing the event yield, mainly in the leading large-$R$-jet category, by 0.6 %.

A list of mass spectra, event categories and their corresponding fit ranges, functional forms, numbers of free parameters and global $\chi^2$ $p$-values from background-only fits. The fit range values are rounded to the nearest 5 GeV. Here $f_1(x)=p_0\left(\mathrm{e}^{-p_1x}+p_2\mathrm{e}^{-(p_1+p_3)x}+p_4\mathrm{e}^{-(p_1+p_3+p_5)x}+\cdots\right)$ and $f_2(x)=p_0(1-x)^{p_1}x^{p_2+p_3\ln\!x+p_4\ln^2\!x+\cdots}$

A list of mass spectra, event categories and their corresponding signal-sensitive mass ranges. The initial BH $p$-value is obtained by using the background derived from the background-only fit in the full fit range, whereas the new BH $p$-value uses the background derived from the background-only fit in the range excluding the initial BH interval.

A list of mass spectra, event categories, relative width values of Gaussian-shaped signals and limit-sensitive mass ranges and fractions, corresponding to the mass values in the previous column, of pseudo-experiments having exclusion upper limits higher than the nominal exclusion limit at 95% CL

Cutflow of HVT model $A$ signals ($W^\prime \to ZW \to \ell\ell qq$) with $m_{W^\prime} = 1$ TeV and $m_{W^\prime} = 4$ TeV based on MC simulations.

Acceptance times efficiency ($\mathcal{A} \times \epsilon$) values in % in the dominant event category for $p^Z_{\mathrm{T}} > 100$ GeV in the $Z \to \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ decay channel.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino-pair production decaying via W bosons.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino-pair production decaying via W bosons.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino-pair production decaying via W bosons.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and h bosons.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and h bosons.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and h bosons.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and h bosons.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and h bosons.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and h bosons.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of higgsino GGM scenarios.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of higgsino GGM scenarios.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of higgsino GGM scenarios.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of higgsino GGM scenarios.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of higgsino GGM scenarios.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of higgsino GGM scenarios.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the production of $\tilde{\chi}_1^{+}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{-}$.

The analyses used in combination for each scenario to set limits in models of the production of $\tilde{\chi}_1^{+}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{-}$.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

The analyses used in combination for each scenario to set limits in models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and Z bosons.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and h bosons.

The analyses used in combination for each scenario to set limits in models of chargino--neutralino production decaying via W and h bosons.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for higgsino GGM scenarios.

The analyses used in combination for each scenario to set limits in higgsino GGM scenarios.

Measured differential cross section dsigma/dET in pb/GeV given q_T < 10 GeV. For the data values, the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. For the theory values, the uncertainty combines statistical, PDF, and renormalization/factorization scale components.

Measured differential cross section dsigma/dET in pb/GeV given q_T > 50 GeV. For the data values, the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. For the theory values, the uncertainty combines statistical, PDF, and renormalization/factorization scale components.

Measured differential cross section dsigma/dDR in pb/radians. For the data values, the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. For the theory values, the uncertainty combines statistical, PDF, and renormalization/factorization scale components.

Measured differential cross section dsigma/dDR in pb/radians given q_T < 10 GeV. For the data values, the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. For the theory values, the uncertainty combines statistical, PDF, and renormalization/factorization scale components.

Measured differential cross section dsigma/dDR in pb/radians given q_T > 50 GeV. For the data values, the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. For the theory values, the uncertainty combines statistical, PDF, and renormalization/factorization scale components.

The jet width distribution for R=1.0 jets in the full 2010 dataset corrected for pileup and corrected to the particle level.

The jet eccentricity distribution for R=0.6 and high mass (M>100 GEV) jets in the full 2010 dataset corrected for pileup and corrected to the particle level.

The jet eccentricity distribution for R=1.0 and high mass (M>100 GEV) jets in the full 2010 dataset corrected for pileup and corrected to the particle level.

The jet planarflow distribution for R=1.0 of high mass (130>M>210 GEV) jets in NPV=1 events corrected to the particle level.

The jet angularity distribution for R=0.6 jets corrected to the particle level.

Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in merged two-prong signal region.

Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in resolved two-prong signal region.

Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in resolved two-prong signal region.

The obtained p-value from comparing data to background estimation across all bins, defined by windows in the X and Y particle masses, in the anomaly signal region.

The obtained p-value from comparing data to background estimation across all bins, defined by windows in the X and Y particle masses, in the anomaly signal region.

The expected 95% CL limits on the cross-section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow Y \rightarrow XH \rightarrow q\bar{q}b\bar{b}$) in pb in the two-dimensional space of $m_Y$ versus $m_X$, obtained from a simultaneous fit of both merged and resolved two-prong signal regions with all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

The expected 95% CL limits on the cross-section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow Y \rightarrow XH \rightarrow q\bar{q}b\bar{b}$) in pb in the two-dimensional space of $m_Y$ versus $m_X$, obtained from a simultaneous fit of both merged and resolved two-prong signal regions with all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

The observed 95% CL limits on the cross-section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow Y \rightarrow XH \rightarrow q\bar{q}b\bar{b}$) in pb in the two-dimensional space of $m_Y$ versus $m_X$, obtained from a simultaneous fit of both merged and resolved two-prong signal regions with all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

The observed 95% CL limits on the cross-section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow Y \rightarrow XH \rightarrow q\bar{q}b\bar{b}$) in pb in the two-dimensional space of $m_Y$ versus $m_X$, obtained from a simultaneous fit of both merged and resolved two-prong signal regions with all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 20-30\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 30-40\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 40-50\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 50-60\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{3}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 0-5\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{3}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 5-10\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{3}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 10-20\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{3}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 20-30\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{3}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 30-40\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{3}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 40-50\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{3}$ result from SP method as a function of $p_{T}$ in 50-60\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from 4-, 6- and 8-particle cumulant methods as a function of $p_{T}$ in 5-10\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from 4-, 6- and 8-particle cumulant methods as a function of $p_{T}$ in 10-20\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from 4-, 6- and 8-particle cumulant methods as a function of $p_{T}$ in 20-30\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from 4-, 6- and 8-particle cumulant methods as a function of $p_{T}$ in 30-40\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from 4-, 6- and 8-particle cumulant methods as a function of $p_{T}$ in 40-50\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}$ result from 4-, 6- and 8-particle cumulant methods as a function of $p_{T}$ in 50-60\% centrality bin of PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Shaded boxes represent systematic uncertainties.

The $v_{2}^{high}$ as a function of $v_{2}^{low}$ results from SP method in PbPb collisions at $sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

The $v_{2}^{high}$ as a function of $v_{2}^{low}$ results from 4-particle cumulant method in PbPb collisions at $sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Per-event jet yields in 0-90% p+Pb collisions, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Per-event jet yields in 0-90% p+Pb collisions, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Per-event jet yields in 0-90% p+Pb collisions, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Per-event jet yields in 0-90% p+Pb collisions, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Per-event jet yields in 0-90% p+Pb collisions, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Per-event jet yields in 0-90% p+Pb collisions, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Per-event jet yields in 0-90% p+Pb collisions, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Per-event jet yields in 0-90% p+Pb collisions, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged particle multiplicity distribution.

Average charged particle transverse momentum as a function of the number of charged particles in the event.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=6 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=6 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 2360 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=6 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=6 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 2360 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=6 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=6 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=20 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=20 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >2500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >2500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=20 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=20 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >2500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >2500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=20 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=20 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >2500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >2500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 900 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >2500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of mass energy of 7000 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >2500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

The average charged-particle muliplicity per unit of rapidity for ETARAP=0 as a function of the centre-of-mass energy.

The average charged-particle muliplicity per unit of rapidity in the pseudorapidity region -2.5 to 2.5 for events with 2 or more charged particles as a function of the centre-of-mass energy.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 5-10% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 10-30% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 10-30% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 30-50% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 30-50% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 50-70% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 50-70% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 70-90% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in 70-90% PbPb centrality class.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in pp collisions. A factor of 70 mb is used to scale the pp spectrum from a differential cross section to a per-event yield for direct comparison to the PbPb spectra. The lumi uncertainty is a 2.3% fully correlated uncertainty.

Charged-particle per-event yields measured in pp collisions. A factor of 70 mb is used to scale the pp spectrum from a differential cross section to a per-event yield for direct comparison to the PbPb spectra. The lumi uncertainty is a 2.3% fully correlated uncertainty.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 0-5% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 0-5% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 5-10% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 5-10% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 10-30% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 10-30% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 30-50% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 30-50% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 50-70% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 50-70% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 70-90% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 70-90% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 0-10% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 0-10% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 0-100% PbPb centrality class.

PbPb nuclear modification factor measured in 0-100% PbPb centrality class.

pPb nuclear modification factor.

pPb nuclear modification factor.

2 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{A})$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Observed combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{A})$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

Expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{A})$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

1 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{A})$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

2 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{A})$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

Observed limits of H(inv) at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Expected limits of H(inv) at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Observed limits of monoh(bb) at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Expected limits of monoh(bb) at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Observed limits of $h\to aa \to \mu\mu\tau\tau$ at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35. Data points included are corresponding to the lower bound of the exclusion contour. The region above the bound was excluded.

Observed limits of $h\to aa \to bbbb$ at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35. Data points included are corresponding to the lower bound of the exclusion contour. The region above the bound was excluded.

Observed limits of $h\to aa \to bb\mu\mu$ at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35. Data points included are corresponding to the lower bound of the exclusion contour. The region above the bound was excluded.

Observed limits of $h\to aa \to 4 \mu$ at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35. Data points included are corresponding to the lower bound of the exclusion contour. The region above the bound was excluded.

Observed limits of $h\to aa \to 4 \mu$ at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35. Data points included are corresponding to the lower bound of the exclusion contour. The region above the bound was excluded.

Observed limits of $h\to aa \to 4 \mu$ at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},m_{\chi})$ plane under the assumption of $m_{A}$ = 1.2 TeV, $tan\beta$ = 1.0 and $sin\theta$ = 0.35. Data points included are corresponding to the lower bound of the exclusion contour. The region above the bound was excluded.

Observed combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{A},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{A},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

1 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{A},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

2 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{A},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Observed combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{A},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

Expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{A},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

1 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{A},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

2 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{A},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

Observed combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

1 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

2 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.35.

Observed combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

Expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

1 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

2 sigma band of expected combination limits at 95% CL in the $(m_{a},tan\beta)$ plane under the assumption of $sin\theta$ = 0.7.

Observed and expected combination limits at 95% CL as a function of $sin\theta$ for the low-mass hypothesis $m_{A}$ = 0.6 TeV, $m_{a}$ = 200 GeV.

Observed and expected combination limits at 95% CL as a function of $sin\theta$ for the high-mass hypothesis $m_{A}$ = 1 TeV, $m_{a}$ = 350 GeV.

Observed and expected combination limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\chi}$ following the parameter choices of $m_{A}$ = 1 TeV, $m_{a}$ = 400 GeV.

The $\Delta p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of photon-tagged jets as a function of jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

The double $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ ratio of $R_{\mathrm{AA}}^{\gamma\text{-jet}}/R_{\mathrm{AA}}^{\text{inclusive jet}}$ as a function of jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

The differential cross-section of photon-tagged jets as a function of jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ in pp collisions.

The yields of photon-tagged jets as a function of jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ in Pb+Pb collisions for different centrality intervals.

The nuclear modification factor of photon-tagged jets as a function of jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for different centrality intervals.

The $\Delta p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of photon-tagged jets as a function of jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

The $R_{\mathrm{CP}}$ of photon-tagged jets as a function of jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

The $\gamma$ differential transverse momentum cross-section in an inclusive $\gamma+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq2$ selection for central rapidities $\vert y_{\gamma} \vert > 1.4$.

The Z boson differential transverse momentum cross-section in an inclusive $Z/\gamma^{*}+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq2$ over $Z/\gamma^{*}+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq1$ selection.

The $\gamma$ boson differential transverse momentum cross-section in an inclusive $\gamma+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq2$ over $Z+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq1$ selection for central rapidities $\vert y_{\gamma} \vert < 1.4$.

The Z boson differential transverse momentum over $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ cross-section in an inclusive $Z/\gamma^{*}+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq2$ selection.

The Z boson differential transverse momentum over $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ cross-section in an inclusive $Z/\gamma^{*}+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq3$ selection.

The log (base 10) of the Z boson differential transverse momentum over the leading jet transverse momentum cross-section in an inclusive $Z/\gamma^{*}+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq2$ selection.

The log (base 10) of the Z boson differential transverse momentum over the leading jet transverse momentum cross-section in an inclusive $Z/\gamma^{*}+\mathrm{jets}$, $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq3$ selection.

Differential cross-section ratio of Z over $\gamma$ as a function of the total transverse momentum cross-section and for central bosons ($\vert y_{\mathrm{V}}\vert < 1.4$) in an inclusive $ N_{\mathrm{jets}}\geq 1 $ selection.

Differential cross-section ratio of Z over $\gamma$ as a function of the total transverse momentum cross-section and for central bosons ($\vert y_{\mathrm{V}}\vert < 1.4$) in a $ H_{\mathrm{T}}$% > 300 GeV, N_{\mathrm{jets}}\geq 1 $ selection.

Differential cross-section ratio of Z over $\gamma$ as a function of the total transverse momentum cross-section and for central bosons ($\vert y_{\mathrm{V}}\vert < 1.4$) in an inclusive $ N_{\mathrm{jets}}\geq 2 $ selection.

Differential cross-section ratio of Z over $\gamma$ as a function of the total transverse momentum cross-section and for central bosons ($\vert y_{\mathrm{V}}\vert < 1.4$) in an inclusive $ N_{\mathrm{jets}}\geq 3 $ selection.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total uncertainty on the measured values of $\sigma(tq)$, $\sigma(\bar{t}q)$, $R_t$, and $\sigma(tq+\bar{t}q)$. The evaluation of the systematic uncertainties has a statistical uncertainty of $0.3\,\%$. Uncertainties contributing less than $1.0\,\%$ are marked with "$<1$" in the paper. To provide numerical values for this table in HEPdata, these uncertainties are approximated with $\pm 0.5\,\%$. This approximation is applied to all measurements for the following uncertainties$:$ JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by-jets, JES pileup, $b$-JES, jet vertex fraction, mistag efficiency and $W+\;$jets shape variation. For the measurement of $\sigma(tq)$ the approximation is applied in addition to the following uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $c$-tagging efficiency, $t\bar{t}$ generator + parton shower and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR. For the measurement of $\sigma(\bar{t}q)$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR. For the measurement of $R_t$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES detector, $b$-tagging efficiency, $c$-tagging efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance and $tq$ scale variations. For the measurement of $\sigma(tq+\bar{t}q)$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $c$-tagging efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $t\bar{t}$ generator + parton shower and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections and normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections as functions of ABS(YRAP(T)).

The cross sections for top-quark and top-antiquark production in the t-channel, together with the cross-section ratio.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections and normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections as functions of ABS(YRAP(TBAR)).

Parametrization factors for the $m_{t}$ dependence [see Eq. (4) in the paper] of $\sigma(tq)$, $\sigma(\bar tq)$, and $\sigma(t q+\bar t q)$.

The cross sections for top-quark and top-antiquark production in the t-channel, together with the cross-section ratio.

The value of $|V_{tb}|^{2}$ is extracted by dividing the measured value of $\sigma(t q+\bar t q)$ by the prediction of the approximate NNLO calculation. The experimental and theoretical uncertainties are added in quadrature.

Event yields for the 2-jet-$\ell^{+}$ and 2-jet-$\ell^{-}$ HPR channels. The expectation for the signal and background yields correspond to the result of the binned maximum-likelihood fit described in Sec. $\mathrm{VI~D}$ in the paper. The uncertainty of the expectations is the normalization uncertainty of each process after the fit, as described in Sec. $\mathrm{VII~F}$ in the paper.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell \nu b)$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell \nu b)$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-antiquark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $|y(t)|$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $|y(\ell \nu b)|$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-quark $|y|$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $|y(\bar t)|$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $|y(\ell \nu b)|$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-antiquark $|y|$ distribution.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Comparison between the measured differential cross sections and the predictions from the NLO calculation using the MSTW2008 PDF set. For each variable and prediction a $\chi^{2}$ value is calculated with HERAfitter using the covariance matrix of each measured spectrum. The theory uncertainties of the predictions are treated as uncorrelated. The number of degrees of freedom (NDF) is equal to the number of bins in the measured spectrum.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, mistag efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(\bar t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The JES $\eta$ intercalibration uncertainty has a sign switch from the first to the second bin. For the $tq$ generator $+$ parton shower uncertainty a sign switch is denoted with $\mp$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $c-$tagging efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, b-JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $b-$tagging efficiency, $c-$tagging efficiency, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(\bar t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content $:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, b-JES, jet energy resolution, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $b-$tagging efficiency, $c-$ tagging efficiency, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$.

Observed values of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the single-Higgs and double-Higgs analyses combination, with all other coupling modifiers fixed to unity.

Observed values of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the double-Higgs analyses, with all other coupling modifiers fixed to unity.

Observed values of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the single-Higgs analyses, with all other coupling modifiers fixed to unity.

Observed values of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the single-Higgs and double-Higgs combination for the generic model (free floating $\kappa_t$, $\kappa_b$, $\kappa_V$ and $\kappa_\tau$). The observed best-fit value of $\kappa_\lambda$ for the generic model is shifted slightly relative to the other models because of its correlation with the best-fit values of the $\kappa_b$, $\kappa_t$ and $\kappa_\tau$ parameters, which are slightly below, but compatible with unity.

Expected values of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the single-Higgs and double-Higgs analyses combination derived from the combined single-Higgs and double-Higgs analyses, with all other coupling modifiers fixed to unity.

Expected values of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the double-Higgs analyses.

Expected values of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the single-Higgs analyses, with all other coupling modifiers fixed to unity.

Expected values of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the single-Higgs and double-Higgs analyses for the generic model (free floating $\kappa_t$, $\kappa_b$, $\kappa_V$ and $\kappa_\tau$).

Observed constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from single-Higgs and double-Higgs combination. The solid lines show the 68% CL contours. The observed constraint for the single- and double-Higgs combination for $\kappa_t$ values below unity is slightly less stringent than that for the single-Higgs fit alone due to the slightly higher best-fit value for this coupling modifier.

Observed constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from single-Higgs and double-Higgs combination. The dashed lines show the 95% CL contours. The observed constraint for the single- and double-Higgs combination for $\kappa_t$ values below unity is slightly less stringent than that for the single-Higgs fit alone due to the slightly higher best-fit value for this coupling modifier.

Observed constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from double-Higgs analysis. The solid lines show the 68% CL contours. The double-Higgs contours are shown for values of $\kappa_t$ smaller than 1.2.

Observed constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from double-Higgs analysis. The dashed lines show the 95% CL contours. The double-Higgs contours are shown for values of $\kappa_t$ smaller than 1.2.

Observed constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from single-Higgs analysis. The solid lines show the 68% CL contours.

Observed constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from single-Higgs analysis. The dashed lines show the 95% CL contours.

Expected constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from single-Higgs and double-Higgs combination. The solid lines show the 68% CL contours. The double-Higgs contours are shown for values of $\kappa_t$ smaller than 1.2.

Expected constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from single-Higgs and double-Higgs combination. The dashed lines show the 95% CL contours. The double-Higgs contours are shown for values of $\kappa_t$ smaller than 1.2.

Expected constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from double-Higgs analyses. The solid lines show the 68% CL contours. The double-Higgs contours are shown for values of $\kappa_t$ smaller than 1.2.

Expected constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from double-Higgs analyses. The dashed lines show the 95% CL contours. The double-Higgs contours are shown for values of $\kappa_t$ smaller than 1.2.

Expected constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from single-Higgs analyses. The solid lines show the 68% CL contours.

Expected constraints in the $\kappa_\lambda$–$\kappa_t$ plane from single-Higgs analyses. The dashed lines show the 95% CL contours.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the sum of the ggF HH and VBF HH production cross-section from the bbbb, bb$\tau\tau$ and bb$\gamma\gamma$ decay channels, and their statistical combination. The value $m_H$=125.09 GeV is assumed when deriving the predicted SM cross section. The expected limit and the corresponding error bands are derived assuming the absence of the HH process with all nuisance parameters profiled to the observed data. The SM prediction together with its theoretical uncertainty is also shown (red vertical band).

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the HH to bbbb analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the HH to bb$\tau\tau$ analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the HH to bb$\gamma\gamma$ analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for the double-Higgs combination. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for HH to bbbb analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for HH to bb$\tau\tau$ analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for HH to bb$\gamma\gamma$ analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for double-Higgs combination. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for the HH to bbbb analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for the HH to bb$\tau\tau$ analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for the HH to bb$\gamma\gamma$ analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for the double-Higgs combination. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for the HH to bbbb analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for the HH to bb$\tau\tau$ analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for the HH to bb$\gamma\gamma$ analysis. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for the double-Higgs combination. All other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM value.

Observed constraints in the $\kappa_{2V}$–$\kappa_{V}$ plane from double-Higgs combination. The solid lines show the 68% (95%) CL contours.

Observed constraints in the $\kappa_{2V}$–$\kappa_{V}$ plane from double-Higgs combination. The dashed lines show the 68% (95%) CL contours.

Expected constraints in the $\kappa_{2V}$-$\kappa_{V}$ plane from double-Higgs combination. The solid lines show the 68% CL contours.

Expected constraints in the $\kappa_{2V}$-$\kappa_{V}$ plane from double-Higgs combination. The dashed lines show the 95% CL contours.

The efficiency for simulated VBF events to pass each analysis cut.

The efficiency for simulated VH events to pass each analysis cut.

The efficiency for simulated ttH events to pass each analysis cut.

The fractional contribution of each production mode to a given analysis region around the Higgs boson peak, defined as 105 < mJ < 140 GeV. The fraction is given with respect to the total signal yield in the analysis region in question.

Signal acceptance times efficiency within the fiducial volume used in the fiducial region.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for the STXS volumes in the differential measurement. Along with the pTH requirements shown, |yH | < 2 is required. For events with pTH < 300 GeV, the acceptance times efficiency is less than 0.1 × 10−2.

Event yields and associated uncertainties after the global likelihood fit in the pT(H) > 450 GeV fiducial region. The total background yield can differ from the sum of the individual components due to rounding.

Event yields and associated uncertainties after the global likelihood fit of the differential regions. The total background yield can differ from the sum of the individual components due to rounding. The five STXS volumes are labeled pT0–pT4 corresponding to pTH < 300 GeV, 300 – 450 GeV, 450 – 650 GeV, 650 – 1000 GeV, and > 1000 GeV, respectively. The pT0 event yield is constrained to its SM value within the theoretical and experimental uncertainties and free parameters act independently on the remaining four volumes.

Post-fit event yields in the signal and control regions obtained from a scan over $\epsilon_{VV}$ exploiting both shape and rate information. The quoted uncertainties include the theoretical and experimental systematic sources and those due to sample statistics. The fit constrains the total expected yield to the observed yield. The diboson background is split into $W W$ and non-$W W$ contributions.

Best-fit values and their uncertainties as obtained from the shape-only and shape-plus-rate likelihood fits to the Asimov dataset and to ATLAS data. Results of both shape-only and shape+rate fits for $a_L$ and $a_T$ are shown. Results of fits to one parameter with the other one fixed or profiled are presented.

Best-fit values and their uncertainties as obtained from the shape-only and shape-plus-rate likelihood fits to the Asimov dataset and to ATLAS data. Results of both shape-only and shape+rate fits for $\epsilon_{VV}$ and $\kappa_{VV}$ are shown. Results of fits to one parameter with the other one fixed or profiled are presented.

The contributions of the leading individual systematic uncertainties together with the data statistical uncertainties, in the one dimensional fit for the pseudo-observables $\kappa_{VV}$ (a) and $\epsilon_{VV}$ (b) for electroweak-boson polarisation in the VBF $H\to WW$ channel. Both shape and rate informations are exploited in the fit. The theoretical and experimental uncertainties are subdivided further into categories.

The contributions of the leading individual systematic uncertainties together with the data statistical uncertainties, in the one dimensional fit for the pseudo-observables $\kappa_{VV}$ (a) and $\epsilon_{VV}$ (b) for electroweak-boson polarisation in the VBF $H\to WW$ channel. Both shape and rate informations are exploited in the fit. The theoretical and experimental uncertainties are subdivided further into categories.

Post-fit distribution of the BDT response observable presented in the four $|\Delta \eta jj|$ categories of the ggF +2 jets signal region, with signal and background yields fixed from the fit for $\mu^{\text{ggF+2jets}}$. The distributions of the ggF + 2 jets and VBF processes are overlaid with their respective contributions multiplied by 50.

The weighted $\Delta \Phi_{jj}$ post-fit distribution in the ggF +2 jets signal region, with signal and background yields fixed from the fit to $\tan \alpha$ using shape and rate information.

Expected and observed likelihood curves for scans over $\tan \alpha$ where only the shape is taken into account in the fit, $\mu_{VBF}$ is fixed.

Expected and observed likelihood curves for scans over $\tan \alpha$ where both shape and normalisation are taken into account in the fit, $\mu_{VBF}$ is fixed.

68% and 95% CL two-dimensional likelihood contours of the CP-even and CP-odd coupling parameters $K_{gg} \cos(\alpha)$ and $K_{gg} \sin(\alpha)$. The minima are represented by black stars, while the SM value is shown as a red star.

The weighted $\Delta \Phi jj$ distribution in the VBF signal region, with signal and background yields fixed from the fit for $\epsilon_{VV}$ using shape and rate information.

Likelihood scans over the transversally polarised couplings. The fit is using shape-only information. All relevant experimental and modelling systematic uncertainties are considered in the fit.