Expected 95% CL lower limit on the VLQ $T$ mass as a function of the decay branching ratios into $W b$ and $Ht$.

Observed 95% CL lower limit on the VLQ $T$ mass as a function of the decay branching ratios into $W b$ and $Ht$.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour (-1$\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The observed 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.1 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour (+1$\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.1 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour (-1$\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.1 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.1 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The observed 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ =1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour ($+1\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ =1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour ($-1\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ =1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ =1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The observed 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving for a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.01 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour ($+1\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving for a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.01 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour ($-1\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving for a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.01 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving for a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.01 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The 90% CL exclusion limit on the $\chi$-proton scattering cross section in a simplifed model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$.

The 90% CL exclusion limit on the $\chi$-nucleon scattering cross section in a simplifed model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$.

The observed and expected 95% CL limits on M* for a dimension-7 operator EFT model with a contact interaction of type $\gamma\gamma\chi\chi$ as a function of dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$.

The observed and expected limit at 95% CL on the production cross section of a $Z\gamma$ resonance as a function of its mass.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on signal strength $\mu$, the ratio of the experimental limit to the predicted signal cross section, for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25 and $g_{\chi}$ = 1 as a function of the DM and the mediator particle masses. The bound on $\mu$ only applies for choices of couplings that yield the same kinematic distributions as the benchmark model.

Acceptance, in %, for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$= 0.25 and $g_{\chi}$ = 1 for various $m_{\chi}$ and $m_{\textrm{med}}$ values. It is constant as a function of $m_{\chi}$ for a fixed $m_{\textrm{med}}$ in the region $m_{\textrm{med}}>2m_{\chi}$.

Fiducial reconstruction efficiencies in the three inclusive signal regions for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$= 0.25 and $g_{\chi}$ = 1 for various $m_{\chi}$ and $m_{\textrm{med}}$ values. It is constant as a function of $m_{\chi}$ for a fixed $m_{\textrm{med}}$ in the region $m_{\textrm{med}}>2m_{\chi}$.

The statistical error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).

The bin-uncorrelated systematic error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).

The bin-correlated systematic error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-tag category of the 2tau_h channel. Despite listing this as an exclusive final state (as there must be at least one b-jets), there is no explicit selection on the presence of additional light-flavour jets. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 300, 500 and 800 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 10 in the hMSSM scenario are also provided.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution for the b-inclusive selection in the 1l1tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. In the paper, the first bin is cut off at 60 GeV for aesthetics but contains underflows down to 50 GeV as in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The prediction for a SSM Zprime with masses of 1500, 2000 and 2500 GeV are also provided.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution for the b-inclusive selection in the 2tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The prediction for a SSM Zprime with masses of 1500, 2000 and 2500 GeV are also provided.

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

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the Drell Yan production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the Zprime boson mass.

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

Ratio of the 95% CL upper limits on the production cross section times branching fraction for alternate Zprime models with respect to the SSM, both observed and expected are shown.

Acceptance, acceptance times efficiency and b-tag category fraction for a scalar boson produced by gluon-gluon fusion as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Acceptance, acceptance times efficiency and b-tag category fraction for a scalar boson produced by b-associated production as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Acceptance and acceptance times efficiency for a heavy gauge boson produced by Drell Yan as a function of the gauge boson mass.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

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

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the production cross section times branching ratio to a photon and a quark or gluon for the ADD model. The limits are placed as a function of M_th. The calculation is performed using ensemble tests for masses in the search range every 500 GeV.

Fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the ADD model as a function of M_th.

Fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the RS1 model as a function of M_th.

rapidity bin 1.5 < |Y| < 2.0 anti-kt R=0.6

rapidity bin 2.0 < |Y| < 2.5 anti-kt R=0.6

rapidity bin 2.5 < |Y| < 3.0 anti-kt R=0.6

rapidity bin 0 < |Y| < 0.5 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 0.5 < |Y| < 1.0 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 1.0 < |Y| < 1.5 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 1.5 < |Y| < 2.0 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 2.0 < |Y| < 2.5 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 2.5 < |Y| < 3.0 anti-kt R=0.4

D(pt) distributions for pp and Pb+Pb collisions, jet rapidity 1.2 < |y| < 2.1.

D(z) distributions for pp and Pb+Pb collisions, jet rapidity |y| < 2.1.

D(z) distributions for pp and Pb+Pb collisions, jet rapidity |y| < 0.3.

D(z) distributions for pp and Pb+Pb collisions, jet rapidity 0.3 < |y| < 0.8.

D(z) distributions for pp and Pb+Pb collisions, jet rapidity 1.2 < |y| < 2.1.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 0.3, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 0.3, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 0.3, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 0.3, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with 0.3 < |y| < 0.8, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with 0.3 < |y| < 0.8, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with 0.3 < |y| < 0.8, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with 0.3 < |y| < 0.8, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with 1.2 < |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with 1.2 < |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with 1.2 < |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with 1.2 < |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 0.3, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 0.3, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 0.3, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 0.3, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with 0.3 < |y| < 0.8, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with 0.3 < |y| < 0.8, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with 0.3 < |y| < 0.8, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with 0.3 < |y| < 0.8, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with 1.2 < |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with 1.2 < |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with 1.2 < |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with 1.2 < |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 126 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 126 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 126 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 126 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 126 < pt < 158 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 126 < pt < 158 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 126 < pt < 158 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 126 < pt < 158 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 158 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 158 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 158 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 158 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 126 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 126 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 126 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 126 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 126 < pt < 158 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 126 < pt < 158 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 126 < pt < 158 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 126 < pt < 158 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 0-10 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 158 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 20-30 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 158 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 30-40 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 158 < pt < 398 GeV.

Ratio of D(z) distributions collisions, centrality 60-80 PCT for jets with |y| < 2.1, 158 < pt < 398 GeV.

The difference between the total yield of particles with 1 < pt^trk < 4 GeV measured in 0-80 PCT Pb+Pb collisions and the total yield measured in the same pt interval measured in pp collisions in jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

The difference between the total yield of particles with 4 < pt^trk < 25 GeV measured in 0-80 PCT Pb+Pb collisions and the total yield measured in the same pt interval measured in pp collisions in jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

The difference between the total yield of particles with 25 < pt^trk < 100 GeV measured in 0-80 PCT Pb+Pb collisions and the total yield measured in the same pt interval measured in pp collisions in jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

The difference between the total transverse momentum of particles with 1 < pt^trk < 4 GeV measured in 0-80 PCT Pb+Pb collisions and the total transverse momentum of particles in the same pt interval measured in pp collisions in jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

The difference between the total transverse momentum of particles with 4 < pt^trk < 25 GeV measured in 0-80 PCT Pb+Pb collisions and the total transverse momentum of particles in the same pt interval measured in pp collisions in jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

The difference between the total transverse momentum of particles with 25 < pt^trk < 100 GeV measured in 0-80 PCT Pb+Pb collisions and the total transverse momentum of particles in the same pt interval measured in pp collisions in jets with |y| < 2.1, 100 < pt < 398 GeV.

The ratio of R_D(z) distributions in three rapidity selections for 0-10 PCT Pb+Pb collisions.

The ratio of R_D(z) distributions in three rapidity selections for 10-20 PCT Pb+Pb collisions.

The ratio of R_D(z) distributions in three rapidity selections for 20-30 PCT Pb+Pb collisions.