Ratio of unfolded width of azimuthal angular correlation distributions (P PB/ P P). Different colors correspond to different combinations of p_{T,1} and p_{T,2}

Ratio of unfolded Dijet conditional yields (P PB/ P P). Different colors correspond to different combinations of p_{T,1} and p_{T,2}

Unfolded width of azimuthal angular correlation distributions (Delta p_{T} > 3). Full markers represent p+Pb, open markers p+p

Unfolded Dijet conditional yields (Delta p_{T} > 3). Full markers represent p+Pb, open markers p+p

Ratio of unfolded width of azimuthal angular correlation distributions (P PB/ P P) (Delta p_{T} > 3). Different colors correspond to different combinations of p_{T,1} and p_{T,2}

Ratio of unfolded Dijet conditional yields (P PB/ P P) (Delta p_{T} > 3). Different colors correspond to different combinations of p_{T,1} and p_{T,2}

Unfolded azimuthal angular correlation distributions. Black markers represent p+Pb, red markers p+p

Unfolded azimuthal angular correlation distributions (Delta p_{T} > 3). Black markers represent p+Pb, red markers p+p

Predicted ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $0.6<|\eta^{\gamma}|<1.37$.

Measured ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $1.56<|\eta^{\gamma}|<1.81$.

Predicted ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $1.56<|\eta^{\gamma}|<1.81$.

Measured ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $1.81<|\eta^{\gamma}|<2.37$.

Predicted ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $1.81<|\eta^{\gamma}|<2.37$.

Measured double ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production and Z-boson production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $|\eta^{\gamma}|<0.6$.

Predicted double ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production and Z-boson production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $|\eta^{\gamma}|<0.6$.

Measured double ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production and Z-boson production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $0.6<|\eta^{\gamma}|<1.37$.

Predicted double ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production and Z-boson production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $0.6<|\eta^{\gamma}|<1.37$.

Measured double ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production and Z-boson production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $1.56<|\eta^{\gamma}|<1.81$.

Predicted double ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production and Z-boson production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $1.56<|\eta^{\gamma}|<1.81$.

Measured double ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production and Z-boson production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $1.81<|\eta^{\gamma}|<2.37$.

Predicted double ratio of cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production and Z-boson production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $1.81<|\eta^{\gamma}|<2.37$.

The 95% CL upper limits of the cross section times branching fraction of $\Phi \to \mu^+\mu^-$ for b-associated production

The observed/expected 95% CL upper limits of the cross section times branching fraction of $\Phi \to \mu^+\mu^-$ as a function of $\Phi$ mass and the cross section fraction of the b-associated production.

Signal acceptance for different masses in bTag and bVeto signal regions.

$v_{2}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=21\pm3$

$v_{3}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=21\pm3$

$v_{2}/\epsilon_{2}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=21\pm3$

$v_{1}^{fluc}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=70$

$v_{2}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=70$

$v_{3}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=70$

$v_{2}/\epsilon_{2}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=70$

$v_{1}^{fluc}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=140$

$v_{2}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=140$

$v_{3}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=140$

$v_{2}/\epsilon_{2}$ as a function of $p_{T}(GeV/c)$ for various systems for $<Nch>=140$

$<Nch>$ dependence of $|v_{1}^{fluc}|$, $v_{2}$, $v_{3}$ and $K$ for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of $|v_{1}^{fluc}|$, $v_{2}$, $v_{3}$ and $K$ for U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 193 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of $|v_{1}^{fluc}|$, $v_{2}$, $v_{3}$ and $K$ for Cu+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of $|v_{1}^{fluc}|$, $v_{2}$, $v_{3}$ and $K$ for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of $|v_{1}^{fluc}|$, $v_{2}$, $v_{3}$ and $K$ for d+Au and p+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of elliptic flow scaled with eccentricity ($v_{2}/\epsilon_{2}$) for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of elliptic flow scaled with eccentricity ($v_{2}/\epsilon_{2}$) for U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 193 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of elliptic flow scaled with eccentricity ($v_{2}/\epsilon_{2}$) for Cu+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of elliptic flow scaled with eccentricity ($v_{2}/\epsilon_{2}$) for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV

$<Nch>$ dependence of elliptic flow scaled with eccentricity ($v_{2}/\epsilon_{2}$) for d+Au and p+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV

Ratios of the slopes extracted for each system relative to the slope extracted from a fit to the combined data sets

List of relative uncertainties in the measured cross sections of the $t\bar{t}Z$ and $t\bar{t}W$ processes from the fit, grouped in categories. All uncertainties are symmetrized. The sum in quadrature may not be equal to the total due to correlations between uncertainties introduced by the fit.

The expected and observed 68% and 95% confidence intervals, which include the value 0, for $\mathcal{C}_{i}/\Lambda^{2}$ for the EFT coefficients $\mathcal{C}_{\phi Q}^{(3)}$, $\mathcal{C}_{\phi t}$, $\mathcal{C}_{tB}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{tW}$. The intervals for $\mathcal{C}_{\phi Q}^{(3)}$ are derived setting $\mathcal{C}_{\phi Q}^{(1)}$ to zero; the measurement is sensitive to the difference $\mathcal{C}_{\phi Q}^{(3)}-\mathcal{C}_{\phi Q}^{(1)}$. All results are given in units of 1/TeV$^{2}$. Limits from fits for the EFT coefficients with only the linear term are also shown.

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

$D^0$ spectra in pp collisions

$D^0$ (in terms of (D0 +D0)/2)) spectra in pp collisions

$D^0$ (in terms of (D0 +D0)/2)) spectra in pp collisions. Note, the $\sigma_{NSD}$ = 30 $m$b for p+p was used in the calculations.

Integrated $D^0$ cross section per nucleon-nucleon collision at mid-rapidity for $p_T >0$ (a) and $p_T >4$ GeV/c (b) as a function of centrality $N_{part}$. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The green boxes on the data points depict the overall normalization uncertainties in p+p and Au+Au data respectively.

Integrated $D^0$ cross section per nucleon-nucleon collision at mid-rapidity for $p_T >0$ (a) and $p_T >4$ GeV/c (b) as a function of centrality $N_{part}$. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The green boxes on the data points depict the overall normalization uncertainties in p+p and Au+Au data respectively.

Integrated $D^0$ cross section per nucleon-nucleon collision at mid-rapidity for $p_T >0$ (a) and $p_T >4$ GeV/c (b) as a function of centrality $N_{part}$. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The green boxes on the data points depict the overall normalization uncertainties in p+p and Au+Au data respectively.

Integrated $D^0$ cross section per nucleon-nucleon collision at mid-rapidity for $p_T >0$ (a) and $p_T >4$ GeV/c (b) as a function of centrality $N_{part}$. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The green boxes on the data points depict the overall normalization uncertainties in p+p and Au+Au data respectively.

Integrated $D^0$ cross section per nucleon-nucleon collision at mid-rapidity for $p_T >0$ (a) and $p_T >4$ GeV/c (b) as a function of centrality $N_{part}$. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The green boxes on the data points depict the overall normalization uncertainties in p+p and Au+Au data respectively.

Integrated $D^0$ cross section per nucleon-nucleon collision at mid-rapidity for $p_T >0$ (a) and $p_T >4$ GeV/c (b) as a function of centrality $N_{part}$. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The green boxes on the data points depict the overall normalization uncertainties in p+p and Au+Au data respectively.

$D^0$ $R_{AA}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =200$ GeV for $0-10\%$ (a), $10-40\%$ (b) and $40-80\%$ (c) centrality bins, respectively. The first two and last two data points are presented as empty circles, indicating that the p+p reference is extrapolated into these $p_T$ ranges. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The light and dark green boxes on the right depict the normalization uncertainties in determining the $N_{bin}$ in Au+Au collisions and the total inelastic cross section in p+p collisions, respectively.

$D^0$ $R_{AA}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =200$ GeV for $0-10\%$ (a), $10-40\%$ (b) and $40-80\%$ (c) centrality bins, respectively. The first two and last two data points are presented as empty circles, indicating that the p+p reference is extrapolated into these $p_T$ ranges. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The light and dark green boxes on the right depict the normalization uncertainties in determining the $N_{bin}$ in Au+Au collisions and the total inelastic cross section in p+p collisions, respectively.

$D^0$ $R_{AA}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =200$ GeV for $0-10\%$ (a), $10-40\%$ (b) and $40-80\%$ (c) centrality bins, respectively. The first two and last two data points are presented as empty circles, indicating that the p+p reference is extrapolated into these $p_T$ ranges. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as error bars and brackets on the data points. The light and dark green boxes on the right depict the normalization uncertainties in determining the $N_{bin}$ in Au+Au collisions and the total inelastic cross section in p+p collisions, respectively.

$D^0$ and $\bar{D}^0$ invariant yields at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse momentum for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Global systematic uncertainties in B.R. and $N_{bin}$ are not plotted. Solid lines depict Levy function fits.

$D^0$ and $\bar{D}^0$ invariant yields at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse momentum for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Global systematic uncertainties in B.R. and $N_{bin}$ are not plotted. Solid lines depict Levy function fits.

$D^0$ and $\bar{D}^0$ invariant yields at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse momentum for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Global systematic uncertainties in B.R. and $N_{bin}$ are not plotted. Solid lines depict Levy function fits.

$\bar{D}^0/D^0$ invariant yield ratio at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse momentum for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Dashed lines depict constant function fits to the $\bar{D}^0/D^0$ ratios.

$\bar{D}^0/D^0$ invariant yield ratio at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse momentum for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Dashed lines depict constant function fits to the $\bar{D}^0/D^0$ ratios.

$\bar{D}^0/D^0$ invariant yield ratio at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse momentum for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Dashed lines depict constant function fits to the $\bar{D}^0/D^0$ ratios.

$D_0$ $R_{CP}$ with the $60-80\%$ spectrum as the reference for different centrality classes compared to the LBT model calculations shown by dashed lines [48, 49].

$D_0$ $R_{CP}$ with the $60-80\%$ spectrum as the reference for different centrality classes compared to the LBT model calculations shown by dashed lines [48, 49].

$D_0$ $R_{CP}$ with the $60-80\%$ spectrum as the reference for different centrality classes compared to the LBT model calculations shown by dashed lines [48, 49].

$D^0$ $R_{CP}$ with the $40-60\%$ spectrum as the reference for different centrality classes compared to model calculations from LBT (black dotted lines) and the Duke (blue dashedlines) groups [48-50].

$D^0$ $R_{CP}$ with the $40-60\%$ spectrum as the reference for different centrality classes compared to model calculations from LBT (black dotted lines) and the Duke (blue dashedlines) groups [48-50].

$D^0$ $R_{CP}$ with the $40-60\%$ spectrum as the reference for different centrality classes compared to model calculations from LBT (black dotted lines) and the Duke (blue dashedlines) groups [48-50].

BW fit parameters for $D^0$

BW fit parameters for $D^0$

BW fit parameters for $D^0$

$D^0$ invariant yield at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse kinetic energy ($m_T -m_0$) for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Global systematic uncertainties in B.R. are not plotted. Solid and dashed black lines depict exponential function fits and the dot-dashed line depicts a power-law function fit to the spectrum in the $60-80\%$ centrality bin.

$D^0$ invariant yield at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse kinetic energy ($m_T -m_0$) for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Global systematic uncertainties in B.R. are not plotted. Solid and dashed black lines depict exponential function fits and the dot-dashed line depicts a power-law function fit to the spectrum in the $60-80\%$ centrality bin.

$D^0$ invariant yield at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1)$ vs transverse kinetic energy ($m_T -m_0$) for different centrality classes. Error bars indicate statistical uncertainties and brackets depict systematic uncertainties. Global systematic uncertainties in B.R. are not plotted. Solid and dashed black lines depict exponential function fits and the dot-dashed line depicts a power-law function fit to the spectrum in the $60-80\%$ centrality bin.

mT fit parameters Teff $D^0$

mT fit parameters Teff $D^0$

mT fit parameters Teff $D^0$

mT fit parameters Teff Jpsi

mT fit parameters Teff Jpsi

mT fit parameters Teff Jpsi

mT fit parameters Teff K

mT fit parameters Teff K

mT fit parameters Teff K

mT fit parameters Teff Lambda

mT fit parameters Teff Lambda

mT fit parameters Teff Lambda

mT fit parameters Teff Omega

mT fit parameters Teff Omega

mT fit parameters Teff Omega

mT fit parameters Teff p

mT fit parameters Teff p

mT fit parameters Teff p

mT fit parameters Teff phi

mT fit parameters Teff phi

mT fit parameters Teff phi

mT fit parameters Teff pi

mT fit parameters Teff pi

mT fit parameters Teff pi

mT fit parameters Teff Xi

mT fit parameters Teff Xi

mT fit parameters Teff Xi

Nbin and Npart for different centralities in AuAu collisions

Nbin and Npart for different centralities in AuAu collisions

Nbin and Npart for different centralities in AuAu collisions

Vertex resolution uncertainties for different centralities in Au+Au collisions (for $R_{CP}$ plot)

Vertex resolution uncertainties for different centralities in Au+Au collisions (for $R_{CP}$ plot)

Vertex resolution uncertainties for different centralities in Au+Au collisions (for $R_{CP}$ plot)

Summary of the relative uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section $\sigma^{\mathrm{fid}}_{W^\pm Z j j-EW}$ . The uncertainties are reported as percentages.

Numbers of observed and expected events in the $W^{\pm}Zjj$ signal region and in the three control regions, after the fit. The expected number of $WZjj-EW$ events from $SHERPA$ and the estimated number of background events from the other processes are shown. The sum of the background containing misidentified leptons is labelled "Misid. leptons". The total correlated post-fit uncertainties are quoted.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. the last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Normalized differential cross section, $(1/\sigma_\text{fid})d\sigma_\text{fid}/d\log(m_{bb}/p_\text{T})$, as a function of $\log(m_{bb}/p_\text{T})$ for $m_{bb}$ the invariant mass of the two b-jets.

Data and SM predictions in SRs for the $1lb\bar{b}$ analysis for $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ in SR1Lbb-Medium. All SRs selections but the one on the quantity shown are applied. All uncertainties are included in the uncertainty band. Example SUSY models are superimposed for illustrative purposes.

Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ before the final requirement on $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in SR1Lyy-a. The expected contributions from both the peaking and non-peaking backgrounds are shown as stacked colored histograms. Two example SUSY models are superimposed for illustrative purposes.

Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ before the final requirement on $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in SR1Lyy-b. The expected contributions from both the peaking and non-peaking backgrounds are shown as stacked colored histograms. Two example SUSY models are superimposed for illustrative purposes.

Observed and predicted distributions for $m_{jj}$ in SRSS-j1. All SRs selections but the one on the quantity shown are applied. All uncertainties are included in the uncertainty band. An example SUSY model is superimposed for illustrative purposes.

Observed and predicted distributions for $m_{T2}$ in SRSS-j23. All SRs selections but the one on the quantity shown are applied. All uncertainties are included in the uncertainty band. An example SUSY model is superimposed for illustrative purposes.

The observed exclusion for the $0lb\bar{b}$ channel. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The expected exclusion for the $0lb\bar{b}$ channel. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The observed exclusion for the $1lb\bar{b}$ channel. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The expected exclusion for the $1lb\bar{b}$ channel. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The expected exclusion for the $1l\gamma\gamma$ channel. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The observed exclusion for the $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ channel. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The expected exclusion for the $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ channel. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $3l$ analysis for signal models with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) - m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 130$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $3l$ analysis for signal models with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) - m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 130$ GeV.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $1lb\bar{b}$ analysis for signal models with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) - m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 130$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $1lb\bar{b}$ analysis for signal models with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) - m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 130$ GeV.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $1l\gamma\gamma$ analysis for signal models with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) - m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 130$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $1l\gamma\gamma$ analysis for signal models with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) - m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 130$ GeV.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ analysis for signal models with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) - m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 130$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ analysis for signal models with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) - m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 130$ GeV.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $0lb\bar{b}$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $0lb\bar{b}$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $1lb\bar{b}$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $1lb\bar{b}$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $1l\gamma\gamma$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $1l\gamma\gamma$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The observed cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $3l$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

The expected cross-section exclusion as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}$/$\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$ masses for the $3l$ analysis for signal models assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}) = 0$ GeV.

Acceptance for $0lb\bar{b}$ SRHad-Low signal region. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $0lb\bar{b}$ SRHad-Low signal region.

Acceptance for $0lb\bar{b}$ SRHad-High signal region. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $0lb\bar{b}$ SRHad-High signal region.

Upper cross section limits for the $0lb\bar{b}$ analysis.

Acceptance for $1lb\bar{b}$ SR1Lbb-Low signal region. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiency for $1lb\bar{b}$ SR1Lbb-Low signal region. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $1lb\bar{b}$ SR1Lbb-Medium signal region. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiency for $1lb\bar{b}$ SR1Lbb-Medium signal region. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $1lb\bar{b}$ SR1Lbb-High signal region. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiency for $1lb\bar{b}$ SR1Lbb-High signal region. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Upper cross section limits for the $1lb\bar{b}$ analysis.

Acceptance for $1l\gamma\gamma$ signal region SR1Lyy-a. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $1l\gamma\gamma$ signal region SR1Lyy-a.

Acceptance for $1l\gamma\gamma$ signal region SR1Lyy-b. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $1l\gamma\gamma$ signal region SR1Lyy-b.

Upper cross section limits for the $1l\gamma\gamma$ analysis.

Acceptance for $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ signal region SRSS-j1. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ signal region SRSS-j1. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ signal region SRSS-j23. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ signal region SRSS-j23. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $3L$ SFOS signal region SR3L-SFOS-1J. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $3L$ SFOS signal region SR3L-SFOS-1J. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $3L$ SFOS signal region SR3L-SFOS-0Ja. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $3L$ SFOS signal region SR3L-SFOS-0Ja. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $3L$ SFOS signal region SR3L-SFOS-0Jb. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $3L$ SFOS signal region SR3L-SFOS-0Jb. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $3L$ DFOS signal region SR3L-DFOS-0J. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $3L$ DFOS signal region SR3L-DFOS-0J. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $3L$ DFOS signal region SR3L-DFOS-1Ja. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $3L$ DFOS signal region SR3L-DFOS-1Ja. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Acceptance for $3L$ DFOS signal region SR3L-DFOS-1Jb. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Efficiencies for $3L$ DFOS signal region SR3L-DFOS-1Jb. Note that the acceptance is relative to the total chargino-neutralino production cross section.

Upper cross section limits for the $l^{\pm}l^{\pm}$ analysis.

Upper cross section limits for the $3l$ analysis.

Event selection cutflow for SM background (pre-fit) and representative signal samples for the $0lb\bar{b}$ SR. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. The MC statistics for the signal samples is 50K and 44K events, respectively. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W \rightarrow qq'$ decays. ``All events" for SUSY scenarios represent the total number of signal events for the models considered taking into account the BR of $W \rightarrow qq'$ (0.674) and $h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ (0.582).

Event selection cutflow for SM background (pre-fit) and representative signal samples for the $1lb\bar{b}$ channel. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. The MC statistics for the signal samples is 28K, 29K and 29K events, respectively. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W \rightarrow l \nu$ decays. ``All events" for SUSY scenarios represent the total number of signal events for the models considered taking into account the BR of $W \rightarrow l \nu$ (0.324) and $h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ (0.582).

Event selection cutflow is presented for SM background (pre-fit) and three signal scenarios for the $1l\gamma\gamma$ channel SRs. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. The uncertainties only include statistical uncertainties. The MC statistics for the signal samples is 10K events in all cases. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h \rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ and $W \rightarrow l \nu$ decays. The data-driven-estimated non-peaking background is not evaluated at each stage of the selection, hence only the peaking background cutflow is presented.

Event selection cutflow is presented for one signal scenario for SRSS-j23. The model with next-to-lightest neutralino mass of 175 GeV and massless $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ with 100% BR is considered. The MC statistics for the signal samples is 75K events. Samples are produced with a generator filter which selects events with at least two leptons with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 7$ GeV. ``2SS leptons" indicates the selection of two same-sign electrons or muons as described in the text (Section 6.4).

Event selection cutflow is presented for one signal scenario for SRSS-j1. The model with next-to-lightest neutralino mass of 175 GeV and massless $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ with 100% BR is considered. The MC statistics for the signal samples is 75K events. Samples are produced with a generator filter which selects events with at least two leptons with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 7$ GeV. ``2SS leptons" indicates the selection of two same-sign electrons or muons as described in the text (Section 6.4).

Event selection cut-flow is presented for one signal scenario for each signal regions. The model with next-to-lightest neutralino mass of 150 GeV and massless LSP with 100 \% BR is considered. The MC statistics for the signal samples is 123K events. Samples are produced with a generator filter which selects events with at least two leptons with pT $>$ 7 GeV. ``3L+Trigger" indicates three-lepton and trigger requirements. ``Preselection" includes the veto on bjets, ETmiss above 20 GeV and invariant mass of the three leptons above 20 GeV.