The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for 7 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for 8 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for 9 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for 10 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for 11 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for 12 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for 13 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for 14 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $1\ell$ category for at least 15 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for 4 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for 5 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for 6 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for 7 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for 8 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for 9 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold regions defined for the EWK analysis in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for at least 10 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $1\ell$ category for at least 15 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $1\ell$ category for at least 12 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $1\ell$ category for at least 11 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $1\ell$ category for at least 10 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 100 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $1\ell$ category for at least 8 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 20 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for at least 10 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for at least 8 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for at least 7 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for at least 7 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

The observed data event yields and the corresponding estimates for the backgrounds in the different $b$-jet multiplicity bins for the 100 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold region in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category for at least 6 jets. The background is estimated by including all bins in the fit. All uncertainties, which may be correlated across the bins, are included in the total background uncertainty.

Data event yields compared with the expected contributions from relevant background sources, in the discovery signal regions defined for the $1\ell$ category, as well as the observed and expected 95% CL model-independent upper limits on product of cross-section, acceptance and efficiency (in fb). The parameters of the model are determined in a fit to a reduced set of bins, corresponding to the model-independent fit discussed in the text.

Data event yields compared with the expected contributions from relevant background sources, in the discovery signal regions defined for the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category, as well as the observed and expected 95% CL model-independent upper limits on product of cross-section, acceptance and efficiency (in fb). The parameters of the model are determined in a fit to a reduced set of bins, corresponding to the model-independent fit discussed in the text.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow q\bar{q}\tilde{\chi}^0_1\rightarrow q\bar{q}q\bar{q} \ell\nu$ model.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow q\bar{q}\tilde{\chi}^0_1\rightarrow q\bar{q}q\bar{q} \ell\nu$ model.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow \bar{t}\tilde{t} \rightarrow \bar{t}\bar{b}\bar{s}$ model.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow \bar{t}\tilde{t} \rightarrow \bar{t}\bar{b}\bar{s}$ model.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with bino LSP.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with bino LSP.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with higgsino LSP.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with higgsino LSP.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with wino LSP.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with wino LSP.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the stop pair production model with bino LSP.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the stop pair production model with bino LSP.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the stop pair production model with higgsino LSP.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the stop pair production model with higgsino LSP.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the stop pair production model with wino LSP.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the stop pair production model with wino LSP.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the RPV model with electroweakino prodiction with higgsino LSP hypothesis.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the RPV model with electroweakino prodiction with higgsino LSP hypothesis.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the RPV model with electroweakino prodiction with wino LSP hypothesis.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the RPV model with electroweakino prodiction with wino LSP hypothesis.

Data event yields compared with the expected contributions from relevant background sources, in the discovery signal regions defined for the $1\ell$ category with 20 and 40 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ thresholds. The uncertainties across backgrounds can exhibit strong anticorrelations.

Data event yields compared with the expected contributions from relevant background sources, in the discovery signal regions defined for the $1\ell$ category with 60, 80 and 100 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ thresholds. The uncertainties across backgrounds can exhibit strong anticorrelations.

Data event yields compared with the expected contributions from relevant background sources, in the discovery signal regions defined for the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category with 20 and 40 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ thresholds. The uncertainties across backgrounds can exhibit strong anticorrelations.

Data event yields compared with the expected contributions from relevant background sources, in the discovery signal regions defined for the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category with 60, 80 and 100 GeV jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ thresholds. The uncertainties across backgrounds can exhibit strong anticorrelations.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow q\bar{q}\tilde{\chi}^0_1\rightarrow q\bar{q}q\bar{q} \ell\nu$ model.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow q\bar{q}\tilde{\chi}^0_1\rightarrow q\bar{q}q\bar{q} \ell\nu$ model.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow \bar{t}\tilde{t} \rightarrow \bar{t}\bar{b}\bar{s}$ model.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow \bar{t}\tilde{t} \rightarrow \bar{t}\bar{b}\bar{s}$ model.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with bino LSP.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with bino LSP.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with wino LSP.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with wino LSP.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with higgsino LSP.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with higgsino LSP.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the stop pair production model with bino LSP.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the stop pair production model with bino LSP.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the stop pair production model with wino LSP.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the stop pair production model with wino LSP.

Expected 95% CL excluded cross section for the stop pair production model with higgsino LSP.

Observed 95% CL excluded cross section for the stop pair production model with higgsino LSP.

Acceptance and efficiency for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow q\bar{q}\tilde{\chi}^0_1\rightarrow q\bar{q}q\bar{q} \ell\nu$ model in the $1\ell$ category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow q\bar{q}\tilde{\chi}^0_1\rightarrow q\bar{q}q\bar{q} \ell\nu$ model in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow \bar{t}\tilde{t} \rightarrow \bar{t}\bar{b}\bar{s}$ model in the $1\ell$ category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow \bar{t}\tilde{t} \rightarrow \bar{t}\bar{b}\bar{s}$ model in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with higgsino LSP in the $1\ell$ category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with higgsino LSP in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the stop model with higgsino LSP in the $1\ell$ category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the stop model with higgsino LSP in the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 4 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 5 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 6 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 7 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 8 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category, considering $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 4 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_2$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 5 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_2$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 6 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_2$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 7 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_2$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $1\ell$ category with 8 jets, considering $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_2$ production.

Acceptance and efficiency for the or the electroweakino production model in the EWK analysis discovery SR for the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category, considering $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_2$ production.

Cut flow for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow q\bar{q}\tilde{\chi}^0_1\rightarrow q\bar{q}q\bar{q} \ell\nu$ model with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 2$ TeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1} = 1$ TeV. The column labelled $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{raw}}$ shows the number of generated events, while $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{events}}$ shows the expected number of events with a luminosity of 139fb$^{−1}$. The last column shows the cut flow efficiency with respect to all weighted events. The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 25$ GeV. The efficiency of this cut is considered in the quoted efficiency of the lepton trigger requirement. Selections with negligible inefficiencies on the given sample, such as data quality requirements, are not displayed. Selections that have not been evaluated in the analysis or are not applicable are denoted with a dash (--).

Cut flow for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow \bar{t}\tilde{t} \rightarrow \bar{t}\bar{b}\bar{s}$ model with with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.6$ TeV and $m_{\tilde{t}} = 1$ TeV. The column labelled $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{raw}}$ shows the number of generated events, while $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{events}}$ shows the expected number of events with a luminosity of 139fb$^{−1}$. The last column shows the cut flow efficiency with respect to all weighted events. The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 25$ GeV. The efficiency of this cut is considered in the quoted efficiency of the lepton trigger requirement. Selections with negligible inefficiencies on the given sample, such as data quality requirements, are not displayed. Selections that have not been evaluated in the analysis or are not applicable are denoted with a dash (--).

Cut flow for the gluino $\tilde{g}\rightarrow t\bar{t}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t} tbs$ model with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 2.2$ TeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1} = 1.05$ TeV. The column labelled $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{raw}}$ shows the number of generated events, while $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{events}}$ shows the expected number of events with a luminosity of 139fb$^{−1}$. The last column shows the cut flow efficiency with respect to all weighted events. The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 25$ GeV. The efficiency of this cut is considered in the quoted efficiency of the lepton trigger requirement. Selections with negligible inefficiencies on the given sample, such as data quality requirements, are not displayed. Selections that have not been evaluated in the analysis or are not applicable are denoted with a dash (--).

Cut flow for the stop model with $m_{\tilde{t}} = 1.175$ TeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1} = 0.7$ TeV. The column labelled $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{raw}}$ shows the number of generated events, while $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{events}}$ shows the expected number of events with a luminosity of 139fb$^{−1}$. The last column shows the cut flow efficiency with respect to all weighted events. The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 25$ GeV. The efficiency of this cut is considered in the quoted efficiency of the lepton trigger requirement. Selections with negligible inefficiencies on the given sample, such as data quality requirements, are not displayed. Selections that have not been evaluated in the analysis or are not applicable are denoted with a dash (--).

Cut flow for the electroweakino production model, considering only the production of $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1$, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1,\tilde{\chi}^0_1)= 250$ GeV. The column labelled $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{raw}}$ shows the number of generated events, while $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{events}}$ shows the expected number of events with a luminosity of 139fb$^{−1}$. The last column shows the cut flow efficiency with respect to all weighted events. The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 25$ GeV. The efficiency of this cut is considered in the quoted efficiency of the lepton trigger requirement. Selections with negligible inefficiencies on the given sample, such as data quality requirements, are not displayed. In the $2\ell^{\mathrm{sc}}$ category no events are expected, as only one lepton is expected to be produced in the decay.Selections that have not been evaluated in the analysis or are not applicable are denoted with a dash (--).

Cut flow for the electroweakino production model, considering only the production of $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_2$, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1,\tilde{\chi}^0_2)= 250$ GeV. The column labelled $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{raw}}$ shows the number of generated events, while $\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{events}}$ shows the expected number of events with a luminosity of 139fb$^{−1}$. The last column shows the cut flow efficiency with respect to all weighted events. The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 25$ GeV. The efficiency of this cut is considered in the quoted efficiency of the lepton trigger requirement. Selections with negligible inefficiencies on the given sample, such as data quality requirements, are not displayed. Selections that have not been evaluated in the analysis or are not applicable are denoted with a dash (--).

The centrality dependencies of the $\Delta\gamma\{\psi_\mathrm{ZDC}\}$ for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the A for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the a for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the A/a using full-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the A/a using sub-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the $f_\mathrm{CME}$ using full-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the $f_\mathrm{CME}$ using sub-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the $\Delta\gamma_\mathrm{CME}$ using full-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the $\Delta\gamma_\mathrm{CME}$ using sub-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The $f_\mathrm{CME}$ from different methods for 20-50% centrality Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The $f_\mathrm{CME}$ from different methods for 50-80% centrality Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The $\Delta\gamma_\mathrm{CME}$ from different methods for 20-50% centrality Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The $\Delta\gamma_\mathrm{CME}$ from different methods for 50-80% centrality Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H_T and high-H_T regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.

Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the $W\!h$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H_T and high-H_T regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.

Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.

Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the $W\!h$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.

Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR^offWZ_lowETmiss. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.

Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR^offWZ_highETmiss. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.

Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W^{*}\!Z^{*}$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.

Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR_OS,near distribution in SR^Wh_DF-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p_T in SR^Wh_DF-2, and the (c) E_T^miss and (d) m_T distributions in SR^WZ_0j (with all SR-i bins of SR^WZ_0j summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR_OS,near distribution in SR^Wh_DF-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p_T in SR^Wh_DF-2, and the (c) E_T^miss and (d) m_T distributions in SR^WZ_0j (with all SR-i bins of SR^WZ_0j summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR_OS,near distribution in SR^Wh_DF-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p_T in SR^Wh_DF-2, and the (c) E_T^miss and (d) m_T distributions in SR^WZ_0j (with all SR-i bins of SR^WZ_0j summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR_OS,near distribution in SR^Wh_DF-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p_T in SR^Wh_DF-2, and the (c) E_T^miss and (d) m_T distributions in SR^WZ_0j (with all SR-i bins of SR^WZ_0j summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m_T^m_llmin distribution in (a) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj and (c) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and the |p_T^lep|/E_T^miss distribution in (d) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj. The contributing m_ll^min mass bins within each SR^offWZ category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m_T^m_llmin distribution in (a) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj and (c) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and the |p_T^lep|/E_T^miss distribution in (d) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj. The contributing m_ll^min mass bins within each SR^offWZ category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m_T^m_llmin distribution in (a) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj and (c) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and the |p_T^lep|/E_T^miss distribution in (d) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj. The contributing m_ll^min mass bins within each SR^offWZ category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m_T^m_llmin distribution in (a) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj and (c) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and the |p_T^lep|/E_T^miss distribution in (d) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj. The contributing m_ll^min mass bins within each SR^offWZ category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Observed (N_obs) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N_exp) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross-section (σ_vis⁹⁵) and on the number of signal events (S_obs⁹⁵). The fifth column (S_exp⁹⁵) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.

Observed (N_obs) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N_exp) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ_vis⁹⁵) and on the number of signal events (S_obs⁹⁵). The fifth column (S_exp⁹⁵) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_exp (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃₂⁰) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb^-1 dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃₁^± mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h²=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_{exp} (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_{exp} (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_{exp} (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_{exp} (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_{exp} (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃₁^±, χ̃₂⁰) vs m(χ̃₁⁰) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ_{exp} (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ_theory (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.

Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the RJR selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.

Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the RJR selection. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.

Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p_T^ℓ₁ and (b) H^PP_3,1 distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p^CM_{T ISR} and (d) R_ISR distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p_T^ℓ₁ and (b) H^PP_3,1 distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p^CM_{T ISR} and (d) R_ISR distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p_T^ℓ₁ and (b) H^PP_3,1 distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p^CM_{T ISR} and (d) R_ISR distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p_T^ℓ₁ and (b) H^PP_3,1 distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p^CM_{T ISR} and (d) R_ISR distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃₁^±),m(χ̃₁⁰)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

{Results of the discovery-fit for the SRs of the RJR selection, calculated using pseudo-experiments.} The first and second column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ_vis⁹⁵) and on the number of signal events (S_obs⁹⁵). The third column (S_exp⁹⁵) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5. vspace{0.5em}

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.

Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^WZ_0j, (c,d) SR^WZ_nj regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^WZ_0j, (c,d) SR^WZ_nj regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^WZ_0j, (c,d) SR^WZ_nj regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^WZ_0j, (c,d) SR^WZ_nj regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-0j}, (c,d) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-nj}, and (e,f) SR^Wh_DF regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-0j}, (c,d) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-nj}, and (e,f) SR^Wh_DF regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-0j}, (c,d) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-nj}, and (e,f) SR^Wh_DF regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-0j}, (c,d) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-nj}, and (e,f) SR^Wh_DF regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-0j}, (c,d) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-nj}, and (e,f) SR^Wh_DF regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-0j}, (c,d) SR^Wh_{low-m_ll-nj}, and (e,f) SR^Wh_DF regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

The χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, (c,d) SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, (e,f) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and (g,h) SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.

Summary of onshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (300,200) GeV and m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (600,100) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal points, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.

Summary of $W\!h$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (190,60) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (250,235) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (125,85) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (250,170) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (250,235) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (125,85) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (250,170) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (120,100) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (100,40) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃₂⁰,χ̃₁⁰) = (185,125) GeV χ̃₁^±/χ̃₂⁰ signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb^-1, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-0j, SR^offWZ_lowETmiss-nj, SR^offWZ_highETmiss-0j, and SR^offWZ_highETmiss-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.

Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.

Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.

Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.

Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.

Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Cumulants and their ratios up to the sixth order corrected for non-binomial efficiencies for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-5% centrality. The CBWC is applied for 2.5% centrality bin width. Results from the conventional efficiency correction are shown as black filled circles, results from the unfolding with the binomial detector response are shown as black open circles, and results from beta-binomial detector response with $\alpha+\sigma$, $\alpha$ and $\alpha-\sigma$ are shown in green triangles, red squares and blue triangles, respectively. C5, C6, C2/C1, C5/C1 and C6/C2 are scaled by constant shown in each column.

Collision centrality dependence of net-proton C6/C2 in Au+Au collisions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV within |y| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT (GeV/c) < 2.0. Results with and without the CBWC are overlaid. The results are corrected for detector efficiencies. Points for different calculation methods are staggered horizontally to improve clarity.

Collision centrality dependence of net-proton C6/C2 in Au+Au collisions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV within |y| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT (GeV/c) < 2.0. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. Shaded and hatched bands show the results from UrQMD model calculations The lattice QCD calculations [13, 14] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.

Dijet signal efficiencies as a function of the signal mass and lifetime for events satisfying all event and vertex requirements, with corrections based on systematic differences in the vertex reconstruction efficiency between data and simulation.

The distribution of $d_{\mathrm{BV}}$ for $\geq$5-track one-vertex events in data and three simulated multijet signal samples each with a mass of 1600 GeV. The production cross section for each signal model is assumed to be the lower limit excluded by CMS-EXO-17-018, corresponding to values of 0.8, 0.25, and 0.15 fb for the samples with $c\tau =$ 0.3, 1.0, and 10 mm, respectively. The last bin includes the overflow events. This bin includes one event in data with a vertex with large $d_{\mathrm{BV}}$ that appears to arise from tracks originating from separate pp interaction vertices, consistent with background.

Distribution of the $x$-$y$ distances between vertices, $d_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for 2017 and 2018 data. The background distribution $d_{\mathrm{VV}}^{\kern 0.15em\mathrm{C}}$ (blue continuous line) is constructed from one-vertex events in data, and is normalized to the number of two-vertex events in data with two 3-track vertices. The two vertical red dashed lines separate the regions used in the fit.

Distribution of the $x$-$y$ distances between vertices, $d_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for 2017 and 2018 data. The background distribution $d_{\mathrm{VV}}^{\kern 0.15em\mathrm{C}}$ (blue continuous line) is constructed from one-vertex events in data, and is normalized to the number of two-vertex events in data which have exactly one 4-track vertex and one 3-track vertex. The two vertical red dashed lines separate the regions used in the fit.

Distribution of the $x$-$y$ distances between vertices, $d_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for 2017 and 2018 data. The background distribution $d_{\mathrm{VV}}^{\kern 0.15em\mathrm{C}}$ (blue continuous line) is constructed from one-vertex events in data, and is normalized to the number of two-vertex events in data with two 4-track vertices. The two vertical red dashed lines separate the regions used in the fit.

Distribution of the $x$-$y$ distances between vertices, $d_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for 2017 and 2018 data. The background distribution $d_{\mathrm{VV}}^{\kern 0.15em\mathrm{C}}$ (blue continuous line) is constructed from one-vertex events in data, and is normalized using $\geq$5-track one-vertex event information. The two vertical red dashed lines separate the regions used in the fit.

Predicted yields for the background-only normalized template, predicted yields for three simulated multijet signals each with a mass of 1600 GeV, and the observed yield in each $d_{\mathrm{VV}}$ bin. The production cross section for each signal model is assumed to be the lower limit excluded by CMS-EXO-17-018, corresponding to values of 0.8, 0.25, and 0.15 fb for samples with $c\tau =$ 0.3, 1.0, and 10 mm, respectively. The uncertainties in the signal yields and the systematic uncertainties in the background prediction reflect the systematic uncertainties given in the text.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared for the multijet signals, as a function of mass and $c\tau$. The overlaid mass-lifetime exclusion curves assume pair-production cross sections for the neutralino (red) and gluino (purple) with 100% branching fraction to each model's respective decay mode specified. The solid black (dashed colored) lines represent the observed (median expected) limits at 95% CL. The thin black lines represent the variation of the observed limit within theoretical uncertainties of the signal cross section. The thin dashed colored lines represent the region containing 68% of the expected limit distribution under the background-only hypothesis. The observed limits from the CMS displaced jets search (CMS-EXO-19-021) are also shown in teal for comparison.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared for the multijet signals, as a function of mass and $c\tau$. The overlaid mass-lifetime exclusion curves assume pair-production cross sections for the neutralino (red) and gluino (purple) with 100% branching fraction to each model's respective decay mode specified. The solid black (dashed colored) lines represent the observed (median expected) limits at 95% CL. The thin black lines represent the variation of the observed limit within theoretical uncertainties of the signal cross section. The thin dashed colored lines represent the region containing 68% of the expected limit distribution under the background-only hypothesis. The observed limits from the CMS displaced jets search (CMS-EXO-19-021) are also shown in teal for comparison.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared for the multijet signals, as a function of mass and $c\tau$. The overlaid mass-lifetime exclusion curves assume pair-production cross sections for the neutralino (red) and gluino (purple) with 100% branching fraction to each model's respective decay mode specified. The solid black (dashed colored) lines represent the observed (median expected) limits at 95% CL. The thin black lines represent the variation of the observed limit within theoretical uncertainties of the signal cross section. The thin dashed colored lines represent the region containing 68% of the expected limit distribution under the background-only hypothesis. The observed limits from the CMS displaced jets search (CMS-EXO-19-021) are also shown in teal for comparison.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared for the dijet signals, as a function of mass and $c\tau$. The overlaid mass-lifetime exclusion curves assume pair-production cross sections for the top squark with 100% branching fraction to each model's respective decay mode specified. The solid black (dashed colored) lines represent the observed (median expected) limits at 95% CL. The thin black lines represent the variation of the observed limit within theoretical uncertainties of the signal cross section. The thin dashed colored lines represent the region containing 68% of the expected limit distribution under the background-only hypothesis. The observed limits from the CMS displaced jets search (CMS-EXO-19-021) are also shown in teal for comparison.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared for the dijet signals, as a function of mass and $c\tau$. The overlaid mass-lifetime exclusion curves assume pair-production cross sections for the top squark with 100% branching fraction to each model's respective decay mode specified. The solid black (dashed colored) lines represent the observed (median expected) limits at 95% CL. The thin black lines represent the variation of the observed limit within theoretical uncertainties of the signal cross section. The thin dashed colored lines represent the region containing 68% of the expected limit distribution under the background-only hypothesis. The observed limits from the CMS displaced jets search (CMS-EXO-19-021) are also shown in teal for comparison.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of mass for multijet signals, for a fixed $c\tau$ of 300um in the full Run-2 data set. The neutralino and gluino pair production cross sections are shown for the multijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of mass for dijet signals, for a fixed $c\tau$ of 300um in the full Run-2 data set. The top squark pair-production cross section is shown for the dijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of mass for multijet signals, for a fixed $c\tau$ of 1 mm in the full Run-2 data set. The neutralino and gluino pair production cross sections are shown for the multijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of mass for dijet signals, for a fixed $c\tau$ of 1 mm in the full Run-2 data set. The top squark pair-production cross section is shown for the dijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of mass for multijet signals, for a fixed $c\tau$ of 10 mm in the full Run-2 data set. The neutralino and gluino pair production cross sections are shown for the multijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of mass for dijet signals, for a fixed $c\tau$ of 10 mm in the full Run-2 data set. The top squark pair-production cross section is shown for the dijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of $c\tau$ for multijet signals, for a fixed mass of 800 GeV in the full Run-2 data set. The neutralino and gluino pair production cross sections are shown for the multijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of $c\tau$ for dijet signals, for a fixed mass of 800 GeV in the full Run-2 data set. The top squark pair-production cross section is shown for the dijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of $c\tau$ for multijet signals, for a fixed mass of 1600 GeV in the full Run-2 data set. The neutralino and gluino pair production cross sections are shown for the multijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of $c\tau$ for dijet signals, for a fixed mass of 1600 GeV in the full Run-2 data set. The top squark pair-production cross section is shown for the dijet signals.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of $c\tau$ for multijet signals, for a fixed mass of 2400 GeV in the full Run-2 data set. The neutralino and gluino pair production cross sections are shown for the multijet signals. For $m$ = 2400 GeV, the expected neutralino cross section is $\approx 8\times 10^{-5}$ fb and is not shown.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the product of cross section and branching fraction squared, as a function of $c\tau$ for dijet signals, for a fixed mass of 2400 GeV in the full Run-2 data set. The top squark pair-production cross section is shown for the dijet signals.

Data-to-simulation efficiency correction factors, shown for multijet and dijet signal topologies in several ranges of $c\tau$. Note that these correction factors account for the two long-lived particles in the simulated events, and are therefore the total correction factors used to scale event yields rather than the correction factors one would apply to individual vertices.

Distribution of the azimuthal angle between vertices, $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for 2017 and 2018 data. The background distribution (blue continuous line) is constructed from 3-track one-vertex events in data, and is normalized to the number of 3-track two-vertex events in data.

Distribution of the azimuthal angle between vertices, $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for 2017 and 2018 data. The background distribution (blue continuous line) is constructed from 4-track and 3-track one-vertex events in data, and is normalized to the number of two-vertex events in data which have exactly one 4-track vertex and one 3-track vertex.

Distribution of the azimuthal angle between vertices, $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for 2017 and 2018 data. The background distribution (blue continuous line) is constructed from 4-track one-vertex events in data, and is normalized to the number of 4-track two-vertex events in data.

Distribution of the azimuthal angle between vertices, $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for 2017 and 2018 data. The background distribution (blue continuous line) is constructed from $\geq$5-track one-vertex events in data, and is normalized using one-vertex event information. No $\geq$5-track two-vertex data events pass the selection.

The +1 $\sigma$ band of the observed exclusion contor for the $Z^{\prime}_{B}$ model in the $m_{\chi}$-$m_{Z^{\prime}_{B}}$ plane.

The -1 $\sigma$ band of the observed exclusion contor for the $Z^{\prime}_{B}$ model in the $m_{\chi}$-$m_{Z^{\prime}_{B}}$ plane.

A comparison of the inferred limits to the constraints from direct detection experiments on the spin-independent DM--nucleon cross section in the context of the $Z'_B$ simplified model with vector couplings. Limits are shown at 90% CL.

The observed exclusion contor for the $Z^{\prime}$-2HDM model in the $m_{A}$-$m_{Z^{\prime}}$ plane.

The expected exclusion contor for the $Z^{\prime}$-2HDM model in the $m_{A}$-$m_{Z^{\prime}}$ plane.

The +1 $\sigma$ band of the observed exclusion contor for the $m_{A}$-$Z^{\prime}$-2HDM model in the $m_{Z^{\prime}}$ plane.

The -1 $\sigma$ band of the observed exclusion contor for the $m_{A}$-$Z^{\prime}$-2HDM model in the $m_{Z^{\prime}}$ plane.

The observed exclusion contor for the 2HDM-a model in the $m_{A}$-$m_{a}$ plane.

The expected exclusion contor for the 2HDM-a model in the $m_{A}$-$m_{a}$ plane.

The +1 $\sigma$ band of the observed exclusion contor for the 2HDM-a model in the $m_{A}$-$m_{a}$ plane.

The -1 $\sigma$ band of the observed exclusion contor for the 2HDM-a model in the $m_{A}$-$m_{a}$ plane.

The observed exclusion contor for the 2HDM-a model in the $tan\beta$-$m_{a}$ plane.

The expected exclusion contor for the 2HDM-a model in the $tan\beta$-$m_{a}$ plane.

The +1 $\sigma$ band of the observed exclusion contor for the 2HDM-a model in the $tan\beta$-$m_{a}$ plane.

The -1 $\sigma$ band of the observed exclusion contor for the 2HDM-a model in the $tan\beta$-$m_{a}$ plane.

The exclusion limits at 95% CL for the 2HDM+a model as a function of $\sin \theta$ for $m_{A,H^{\pm},H}$= 600GeV, $m_a$ = 200GeV, $\tan \beta$ = 1.0$.

The exclusion limits at 95% CL for the 2HDM+a model as a function of $\sin \theta$ for $m_{A,H^{\pm},H}$= 1000GeV, $m_a$ = 350GeV, $\tan \beta$ = 1.0$.

Breakdown of the dominant systematic uncertainties.

Event yields in the range of 120 $<m_{\gamma\gamma}<$ 130 GeV for data, signal models, the SM Higgs boson background and non-resonant background in each analysis category, for an integrated luminosity of $139$fb$^{-1}$.

Detailed background contributions from the SM Higgs boson and continuum background for each cut

Detailed contributions from the signals for each cut.

Acceptance times efficiency for several signals in each category.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $25 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 30$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $25 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 30$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The definitions of the four tetralepton signal regions. The regions are defined to target different $b$-jet multiplicities and flavour combinations of the non-Z leptons.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}$ of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}$ of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}$ of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}$ of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the absolute value of rapidity of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the number of jets in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the number of jets in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{l \textrm{non-}Z}$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta y (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (l_{t}^{+}, l_{\bar{t}}^{-})|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (t\bar{t}, Z)|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{l \textrm{non-}Z}$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta y (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (l_{t}^{+}, l_{\bar{t}}^{-})|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (t\bar{t}, Z)|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the absolute value of rapidity of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{l \textrm{non-}Z}$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta y (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (l_{t}^{+}, l_{\bar{t}}^{-})|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (t\bar{t}, Z)|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the absolute value of rapidity of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{l \textrm{non-}Z}$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta y (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|$ in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (l_{t}^{+}, l_{\bar{t}}^{-})|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (t\bar{t}, Z)|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the absolute value of rapidity of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the number of jets in the 3$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the number of jets in the 4$\ell$ channel. The uncertainty is decomposed into four components which are the signal modelling uncertainty, the background modelling uncertainty, the experimental uncertainty, and the data statistical uncertainty.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}$ of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the absolute value of rapidity of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{l \textrm{non-}Z}$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta y (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (l_{t}^{+}, l_{\bar{t}}^{-})|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (t\bar{t}, Z)|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}$ of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the absolute value of rapidity of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{l \textrm{non-}Z}$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta y (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (l_{t}^{+}, l_{\bar{t}}^{-})|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (t\bar{t}, Z)|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised parton-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}$ of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the absolute value of rapidity of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{l \textrm{non-}Z}$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta y (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the number of jets in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (l_{t}^{+}, l_{\bar{t}}^{-})|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (t\bar{t}, Z)|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the absolute particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the number of jets in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}$ of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the absolute value of rapidity of the $Z$ boson in the 3$\ell$+4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{l \textrm{non-}Z}$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta y (Z, t_{\textrm{lep}})|/\pi$ in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the number of jets in the 3$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (l_{t}^{+}, l_{\bar{t}}^{-})|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $|\Delta \phi (t\bar{t}, Z)|/\pi$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the $p_{\textrm{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The total correlation matrix of the normalised particle-level differential cross-section measured in the fiducial phase-space as a function of the number of jets in the 4$\ell$ channel.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$ and SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$ and SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$ and SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR0$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR1$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR2$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ bserved 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the wino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the wino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the slepton/sneutrino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the slepton/sneutrino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the gluino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the gluino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the higgsino GGM models. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Best expected SR for the wino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the wino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the slepton/sneutrino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the slepton/sneutrino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the gluino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the gluino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the higgsino GGM models. A value of 6 corresponds to SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 7 corresponds to SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 8 corresponds to SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}_{\mathrm{bveto}}$, and 9 corresponds to SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}_{\mathrm{bveto}}$.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR5L. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the taus leptons in distribution in SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light taus in distribution in SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with four light leptons and a Z veto. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with four light leptons and one Z candidate. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with four light leptons and two Z candidates. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with exactly five light leptons. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with three light leptons and one tau and a Z veto. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with three light leptons and one tau and one Z candidate. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with two light leptons and two taus and a Z veto. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with two light leptons and two taus and one Z candidate. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

Cutflow event yields in regions SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, SR0$_{\mathrm{breq}}$, and SR5L for RPV models with the $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ coupling. All yields correspond to weighted events, so that effects from lepton reconstruction efficiencies, trigger corrections, pileup reweighting, etc., are included. They are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the data sample, $\int L dt = 139\,\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$. The preliminary event reduction is a centralized stage where at least two electrons/muons with uncalibrated $p_{\mathrm{T}} >$ 9 GeV are required.

Cutflow event yields in regions SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and SR1$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for RPV models with the $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ coupling. All yields correspond to weighted events, so that effects from lepton reconstruction efficiencies, trigger corrections, pileup reweighting, etc., are included. They are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the data sample, $\int L dt = 139\,\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$. The preliminary event reduction is a centralized stage where at least two electrons/muons with uncalibrated $p_{\mathrm{T}} >$ 9 GeV are required.

Cutflow event yields in regions SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and SR2$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for RPV models with the $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ coupling. All yields correspond to weighted events, so that effects from lepton reconstruction efficiencies, trigger corrections, pileup reweighting, etc., are included. They are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the data sample, $\int L dt = 139\,\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$. The preliminary event reduction is a centralized stage where at least two electrons/muons with uncalibrated $p_{\mathrm{T}} >$ 9 GeV are required.

Cutflow event yields in regions SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$, SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and SR5L the higgsino GGM RPC model with BR($\tilde{\chi}^{0}_1 \rightarrow Z \tilde{G}$) = 50% and higgsino masses of 200 GeV, or BR($\tilde{\chi}^{0}_1 \rightarrow Z \tilde{G}$) = 100% and higgsino masses of 300 GeV. All yields correspond to weighted events, so that effects from lepton reconstruction efficiencies, trigger corrections, pileup reweighting, etc., are included. They are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the data sample, $\int L dt = 139\,\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$. The generator filter is a selection of $\geq$4e/$\mu$/$\tau_{\mathrm{had-vis}}$ leptons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}(e,\mu)>4$GeV, $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\tau_{\mathrm{had-vis}})>15$GeV and $|\eta|<2.8$ and is applied during the MC generation of the simulated events. The preliminary event reduction is a centralized stage where at least two electrons/muons with uncalibrated $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 9$ GeV are required.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The $p_{\text{T}}$ dependence of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV for different centrality classes. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Flow coefficients $v_{n}$ as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_{\text{T}}/n_{q}$ for various particles at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

The flow coefficients $v_{n}$ scaled by $\varepsilon_{n}\left\lbrace 2\right\rbrace$ as a function of $p_{\text{T}}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

$v_{n}$ coefficients, scaled by the number of constituent quarks $(n_{q})$ to the power $n/2$ and participant eccentricity $\varepsilon_{n}$, of identified particles versus $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}$ for three centrality bins in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. The error bars represent statistical uncertainties. The bands represent point-by-point systematic uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.

Ratios of $v_{n}$ coefficients at mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 1.0) in minimum bias U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV. Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.