Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. 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 〈TPPB〉. 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 〈TPPB〉. 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 〈TPPB〉. 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 〈TPPB〉. 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 〈TPPB〉. 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 〈TPPB〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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 〈TAA〉. 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.

Measured unfolded differential cross-section as a function of the dilepton transverse momentum $p^{ll}_{\mathrm{T}}$. NLO predictions from Sherpa 2.2.10 and MadGraph5_aMC@NLO 2.7.3 are also shown. The uncertainty in the predictions is divided into statistical and theoretical uncertainties (scale and PDF+$\alpha_{s}$).

Measured unfolded differential cross-section as a function of the the four-body transverse momentum $p^{ll\gamma\gamma}_{\mathrm{T}}$. NLO predictions from Sherpa 2.2.10 and MadGraph5_aMC@NLO 2.7.3 are also shown. The uncertainty in the predictions is divided into statistical and theoretical uncertainties (scale and PDF+$\alpha_{s}$).

Measured unfolded differential cross-section as a function of the diphoton invariant mass $m_{\gamma\gamma}$. NLO predictions from Sherpa 2.2.10 and MadGraph5_aMC@NLO 2.7.3 are also shown. The uncertainty in the predictions is divided into statistical and theoretical uncertainties (scale and PDF+$\alpha_{s}$).

Measured unfolded differential cross-section as a function of the four-body invariant mass $m_{ll\gamma\gamma}$. NLO predictions from Sherpa 2.2.10 and MadGraph5_aMC@NLO 2.7.3 are also shown. The uncertainty in the predictions is divided into statistical and theoretical uncertainties (scale and PDF+$\alpha_{s}$).

Expected and observed $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameters $f_{T,j}/\Lambda^{4}$ of transverse dimension-8 operators. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level. No unitarity constraints are applied.

Expected and observed unitarised $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameter $f_{T,8}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the clipping energy range between 1.1 and 5 TeV. The non-unitarised limits ($E_c = \infty$) are also shown. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level.

Expected and observed unitarised $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameter $f_{T,0}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the clipping energy range between 1.1 and 5 TeV. The non-unitarised limits ($E_c = \infty$) are also shown. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level.

Expected and observed unitarised $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameter $f_{T,1}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the clipping energy range between 1.1 and 5 TeV. The non-unitarised limits ($E_c = \infty$) are also shown. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level.

Expected and observed unitarised $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameter $f_{T,2}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the clipping energy range between 1.1 and 5 TeV. The non-unitarised limits ($E_c = \infty$) are also shown. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level.

Expected and observed unitarised $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameter $f_{T,5}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the clipping energy range between 1.1 and 5 TeV. The non-unitarised limits ($E_c = \infty$) are also shown. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level.

Expected and observed unitarised $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameter $f_{T,6}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the clipping energy range between 1.1 and 5 TeV. The non-unitarised limits ($E_c = \infty$) are also shown. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level.

Expected and observed unitarised $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameter $f_{T,7}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the clipping energy range between 1.1 and 5 TeV. The non-unitarised limits ($E_c = \infty$) are also shown. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level.

Expected and observed unitarised $95\%$ confidence intervals for the coupling parameter $f_{T,9}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the clipping energy range between 1.1 and 5 TeV. The non-unitarised limits ($E_c = \infty$) are also shown. All parameter values outside of the stated range are excluded at the chosen confidence level.

The rho-parameter, i.e. the ratio of the real to imaginary part of the elastic scattering amplitude extrapolated to t=0. The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.

The nuclear slope parameter B from a fit of the form exp(-Bt-Ct^2-Dt^3). The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.

The nuclear slope parameter B from a fit of the form exp(-Bt-Ct^2-Dt^3). The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.

The nuclear slope parameter C from a fit of the form exp(-Bt-Ct^2-Dt^3). The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.

The nuclear slope parameter C from a fit of the form exp(-Bt-Ct^2-Dt^3). The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.

The nuclear slope parameter D from a fit of the form exp(-Bt-Ct^2-Dt^3). The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.

The nuclear slope parameter D from a fit of the form exp(-Bt-Ct^2-Dt^3). The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.

The total elastic cross section measured inside the fiducial volume. The systematic uncertainty includes experimental uncertainties.

The total elastic cross section measured inside the fiducial volume. The systematic uncertainty includes experimental uncertainties.

The total elastic cross section obtained from the fitted parameters, extrapolated to full phase space using only the nuclear amplitude.

The total elastic cross section obtained from the fitted parameters, extrapolated to full phase space using only the nuclear amplitude.

The total inelastic cross section.

The total inelastic cross section.

The ratio of elastic to total cross section.

The ratio of elastic to total cross section.

The differential elastic cross section as function of t with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The systematic uncertainties are given as signed relative change for 20 sources of experimental uncertainty associated to nuisance parameters used in the fit for the extraction of physics parameters.

The differential elastic cross section as function of t with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The systematic uncertainties are given as signed relative change for 20 sources of experimental uncertainty associated to nuisance parameters used in the fit for the extraction of physics parameters.

Statistical covariance matrix for the measurement of the differential elastic cross section as function of t.

Statistical covariance matrix for the measurement of the differential elastic cross section as function of t.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties in percent for the measured fiducial cross section times leptonic branching ratio for Z/gamma* production in the Z/gamma* -> mu+mu- final state at 13TeV.

Measured fiducial cross section times leptonic branching ratio for Z/gamma* production in the combined Z/gamma* -> l+l- (l = e, mu) final state.

Measured total cross section times leptonic branching ratio for Z/gamma* production in the combined Z/gamma* -> l+ l- (l = e, mu) final state.

Measured total cross-section for ttbar events using e-mu events with b-tagged jets.

Correlation coefficients amongst the combined (Z/gamma^* -> l+ l-) where (l = e, mu) fiducial cross section and ttbar total cross section at 13, 8, and 7TeV.

Correlation coefficients amongst the combined (Z/gamma^* -> l+ l-) where (l = e, mu) fiducial cross section and ttbar total cross section at 13, 8, and 7TeV, omitting the common normalisation uncertainty due to the luminosity calibration and beam energy.

Z-boson and ttbar production cross-section single ratios at 13, 8, 7TeV. The beam-energy uncertainty, which largely cancels in the ratios, is included in the systematic uncertainty. In the first column, the total (TOT) cross sections are used for both numerator and denominator. In the second column, the total cross section is used for the numerator while the fiducial (FID) cross section is used for the denominator. In the third column, the fiducial cross sections are used for both numerator and denominator. Apart for the MZ requirement, the kinematic fiducial requirements listed below apply only to the fiducial cross sections. The luminosity uncertainty almost entirely cancels in some of the ratio measurements.

Z-boson and ttbar production cross-section double ratios at 13, 8, 7TeV. The beam-energy uncertainty, which largely cancels in the ratios, is included in the systematic uncertainty. In the first column, the total (TOT) cross sections are used for both ttbar and Z processes. In the second column, the total cross section is used for ttbar while the fiducial (FID) cross section is used for Z. In the third column, the fiducial cross sections are used for both ttbar and Z. Apart for the MZ requirement, the kinematic fiducial requirements listed below apply only to the fiducial cross sections.

Ratios of integrated fiducial CC and NC cross sections obtained from the combination of electron and muon channels with statistical (stat) and systematic (syst) uncertainties. The common fiducial regions are defined in Section 2.3.

Total cross sections times leptonic branching ratios obtained from the combination of electron and muon channels with statistical and systematic uncertainties, for $W^+$, $W^-$, their sum and the $Z/\gamma^*$ process measured at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV. The $Z/\gamma^*$ cross section is defined for the dilepton mass window $m_{\ell\ell} = 66 - 116$ GeV. The uncertainties denote the statistical (stat), the experimental systematic (syst), the luminosity (lumi), and acceptance extrapolation (acc) contributions.

Ratios of total CC and NC cross sections obtained from the combination of electron and muon channels with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The $Z/\gamma^*$ cross section is defined for the dilepton mass window $m_{\ell\ell} = 66 - 116$ GeV. The uncertainties denote the statistical (stat), the experimental systematic (syst), and acceptance extrapolation (acc) contributions.

The correlation coefficients of the $W^+$, $W^-$ and $Z$ fiducial cross-section measurements.

Measurement of the electron-to-muon cross-section ratios for the $W$ and $Z$ production, $R_W$ and $R_Z$. The uncertainties denote the statistical (stat) and the experimental systematic (syst) contributions.

Differential cross section for the $W^+ \to \ell^+\nu$ processes combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^- \to \ell^-\bar{\nu}$ processes combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^- \to e^-\bar{\nu}$ process extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^+ \to e^+\nu$ process extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^- \to \mu^-\bar{\nu}$ process extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^+ \to \mu^+\nu$ process extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \mu\mu$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \mu\mu$ process in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \mu\mu$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Values of $E(W[Z])$ and $A(W[Z])$ correction factors for integrated $W\to\ell\nu$ and $Z\to\ell\ell$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(W[Z])$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region. The $A(W[Z])$ factors, defined in Eq. (9), are used to extract a total cross section. Finally, the ratios of $A(W[Z])$ correction factors are given for four combinations of $W^+$, $W^-$ and $Z$ treating all components of the $A(W[Z])$ uncertainties as correlated between processes, which is relevant for the acceptance uncertainties on the total cross-section ratios.

Values of $E(W)$ correction factors for the differential $W\to\ell\nu$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(W)$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region. This only affects the bin of highest $\eta_\ell$, all other $E(W)$ factors are exactly 1 without uncertainties.

Values of $E(Z)$ correction factors for the differential $Z/\gamma^*\to e^+e^-$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(Z)$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region.

Values of $E(Z)$ correction factors for the differential $Z/\gamma^*\to \mu^+\mu^-$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(Z)$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region.

Values of $E(Z)$ correction factors for the differential forward $Z/\gamma^*\to e^+e^-$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(Z)$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region.

Correlation coefficients between integrated cross sections extrapolated to the total phase space, $\sigma^\mathrm{tot}_{W \to \ell\nu}$ and $\sigma^\mathrm{tot}_{Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell}$ for four combinations of $W^+, W^-, W^{\pm}$ and $Z$. Values are given including and excluding the luminosity uncertainties.

Correlation coefficients between integrated fiducial cross sections in electron and muon channels for $W^{\pm}$ and $Z$. Values are given including and excluding the luminosity uncertainties.

The differential W charge asymmetry $A_{\ell}$ as defined in Eq. (19) from the combined electron and muon channel measurements. All uncertainties are quoted in % with respect to the $A_{\ell}$ values. The statistical (stat), uncorrelated (uncor) and correlated (cor) systematic uncertainties are reported.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the integrated common fiducial cross sections using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the $W^+ \to \ell^+\nu$ process using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the $W^- \to \ell^-\bar{\nu}$ process$ using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial W charge asymmetry $A_{\ell}$ using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$). All predictions are corrected for leading two-loop EW contributions.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$).

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$).

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$).

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$).

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential $W^+ \to \ell^+\nu$ process. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses FEWZ 3.1.b2 for the NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors of 2 and 0.5, respectively. The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions are negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential $W^- \to \ell^-\bar{\nu}$ process. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses FEWZ 3.1.b2 for the NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors of 2 and 0.5, respectively. The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions are negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the integrated common fiducial cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties are negligible on these correction factors.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial $W^+ \to e^+\nu$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial $W^- \to e^-\bar{\nu}$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial $W^+ \to \mu^+\nu$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial $W^- \to \mu^-\bar{\nu}$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial central $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial central $Z/\gamma^* \to \mu\mu$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial forward $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

The measured differential cross-section normalized to the bin width in values of the angle between the leptons in the leading reconstructed lepton pair for the 4 lepton channel. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties.

The measured differential cross-section normalized to the bin width in values of the rapidity difference between the reconstructed lepton pairs for the 4 lepton channel. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties.

The measured differential cross-section normalized to the bin width in values of the leading reconstructed dilepton pT for the 2 lepton, 2 neutrino channel. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties.

The measured differential cross-section normalized to the bin width in values of the angle between the dilepton pair for the 2 lepton, 2 neutrino channel. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties.

The measured differential cross-section normalized to the bin width in values of the transverse mass of the reconstructed diboson pair for the 2 lepton, 2 neutrino channel. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties.

Measured cross-section as a function of angular separation between the muon and the closest jet for $500~\text{GeV} < p_T^{\text{leading jet}} < 600~\text{GeV}$. Multiplicative correction factors for using prompt muons and prompt dressing photons in the particle-level selection, derived from ALPGEN 2.14 interfaced with PYTHIA 6.426, are also shown.

Measured cross-section as a function of angular separation between the muon and the closest jet for $p_T^{\text{leading jet}} > 650~\text{GeV}$. Multiplicative correction factors for using prompt muons and prompt dressing photons in the particle-level selection, derived from ALPGEN 2.14 interfaced with PYTHIA 6.426, are also shown.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta^{p_{\mathrm{T}}}_{13}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta^{p_{\mathrm{T}}}_{23}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta^{p_{\mathrm{T}}}_{14}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta^{p_{\mathrm{T}}}_{24}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{12}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{13}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{23}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{14}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{24}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{12}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{34}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{13}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{23}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{14}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{24}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\phi_{1+2} - \phi_{3+4}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\phi_{1+3} - \phi_{2+4}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\phi_{1+4} - \phi_{2+3}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Results for the DeltaR distribution. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are quoted.

Results for the pT distribution. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are quoted.

Results for the y_B distribution. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are quoted.