Summary of typical systematic uncertainties for the signal.

Numbers of observed events for all signal regions, including predicted background contributions and expected signal yields.

Limits on anomalous quartic couplings at 95% CL.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times the branching ratio sigma(P P --> W+- a)B(a --> W+- W-+) as a function of ALP mass

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the photophobic ALP model parameter 1/f_a as a function of ALP mass.

Observed signal strength, and observed signal cross section.

The observed upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

The observed upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

The observed and expected upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the gluino pair production cross section for a gluino GMSB model with $m_{\tilde{g}}=2400$ GeV. The one (two) standard deviation variation in the expected limit is shown in the inner green (outer yellow) band. The blue solid line shows the observed limit obtained by the CMS displaced jet search

The distribution (normalized to unity) of number of ECAL cells hit in the jet for jets in a background enriched data sample (satisfying $|\eta| < 1.48$, $p_\mathrm{T}tf > 0.08$, $\mathrm{HEF} > 0.2$, $t_{\mathrm{jet}} < -3\,\mathrm{ns}$ and $E^{\mathrm{CSC}}_\mathrm{ECAL}/E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} < 0.8$) and for signal jets satisfying signal region requirements (except those on $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}}$ and $N^{\mathrm{cell}}_{\mathrm{ECAL}}$).

The distribution (normalized to unity) of $\mathrm{HEF}$ for a data sample enriched in beam halo and noise jets (satisfying $|\eta| < 1.48$, $p_\mathrm{T} > 30 \,\mathrm{GeV}$, $p_\mathrm{T}tf < 0.08$, $t_{\mathrm{jet}} < -3\,\mathrm{ns}$, $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} > 20\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}/t_{\mathrm{jet}} < 0.4$) and for signal jets passing signal region selections (except on $\mathrm{HEF}$).

The distribution (normalized to unity) of $E_{\mathrm{HCAL}}$ for a data sample enriched in beam halo and noise jets (satisfying $|\eta| < 1.48$, $p_\mathrm{T} > 30 \,\mathrm{GeV}$, $p_\mathrm{T}tf < 0.08$, $t_{\mathrm{jet}} < -3\,\mathrm{ns}$, $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} > 20\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}/t_{\mathrm{jet}} < 0.4$) and for signal jets passing signal region selections (except on $E_{\mathrm{HCAL}}$).

The distribution (normalized to unity) of $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}/t_{\mathrm{jet}}$ for data sample enriched in jets from noise (satisfying $|\eta| < 1.48$, $p_\mathrm{T} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $p_\mathrm{T}tf > 0.08$, $\mathrm{HEF} > 0.2$, $t_{\mathrm{jet}} < -3\,\mathrm{ns}$, $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} > 20 \,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $E^{\mathrm{CSC}}_\mathrm{ECAL}/E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} < 0.8$) and for signal jets passing signal region selections (except on $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}/t_{\mathrm{jet}}$ and $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}$)

The distribution (normalized to unity) of $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}$ for data sample enriched in jets from noise (satisfying $|\eta| < 1.48$, $p_\mathrm{T} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $p_\mathrm{T}tf > 0.08$, $\mathrm{HEF} > 0.2$, $t_{\mathrm{jet}} < -3\,\mathrm{ns}$, $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} > 20 \,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $E^{\mathrm{CSC}}_\mathrm{ECAL}/E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} < 0.8$) and for signal jets passing signal region selections (except on $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}/t_{\mathrm{jet}}$ and $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}$)

The distribution (normalized to unity) of $p_\mathrm{T}tf$ for a data sample enriched in main bunch backgrounds (satisfying $p_\mathrm{T} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta| < 1.48$, $E^{\mathrm{CSC}}_\mathrm{ECAL}/E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} < 0.8$, $|t_{\mathrm{jet}}| < 3\,\mathrm{ns}$ and $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} >20\,\mathrm{GeV}$) and for signal jets passing signal selections (except on $p_\mathrm{T}tf$).

The distribution (normalized to unity) of $E^{\mathrm{CSC}}_\mathrm{ECAL}/E_{\mathrm{ECAL}}$ for a data sample enriched in beam halo (satisfying $p_\mathrm{T} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta| < 1.48$, $p_\mathrm{T}tf < 0.08$, $\mathrm{HEF} < 0.2$, $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}/t_{\mathrm{jet}} < 0.4$, $t_{\mathrm{jet}} < -3\,\mathrm{ns}$ and $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} > 20\,\mathrm{GeV}$) and for signal jets passing signal selections (except on $E^{\mathrm{CSC}}_\mathrm{ECAL}/E_{\mathrm{ECAL}}$)

The distribution (normalized to unity) of $\mathrm{max}(\Delta \phi_{\mathrm{DT}})$ for a data sample enriched in cosmic muons (satisfying $E^{\mathrm{CSC}}_\mathrm{ECAL}/E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} < 0.8$, $p_\mathrm{T} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta| < 1.48$, $p_\mathrm{T}tf < 0.08$, $\mathrm{HEF} > 0.2$, $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}/t_{\mathrm{jet}} < 0.4$, $t_{\mathrm{jet}} > 3\,\mathrm{ns}$, $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} > 20\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and failing the HCAL noise rejection quality filters) and for signal jets passing signal selections (except on $\mathrm{max}(\Delta \phi_{\mathrm{DT}})$).

The distribution (normalized to unity) of $\mathrm{max}(\Delta \phi_{\mathrm{RPC}})$ for a data sample enriched in cosmic muons (satisfying $E^{\mathrm{CSC}}_\mathrm{ECAL}/E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} < 0.8$, $p_\mathrm{T} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta| < 1.48$, $p_\mathrm{T}tf < 0.08$, $\mathrm{HEF} > 0.2$, $t^{\mathrm{RMS}}_\mathrm{jet}/t_{\mathrm{jet}} < 0.4$, $t_{\mathrm{jet}} > 3\,\mathrm{ns}$, $E_{\mathrm{ECAL}} > 20\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and failing the HCAL noise rejection quality filters) and for signal jets passing signal selections (except on $\mathrm{max}(\Delta \phi_{\mathrm{RPC}})$).

Distribution of $t_{\mathrm{jet}}$ for jets with the full Run 2 dataset with no cleaning selection applied (a) and after all jet cleaning selections are applied (b) in events satisfying the trigger requirements and satisfying $p_T^\mathrm{miss} > 300$. The jets are required to pass an inverted selection of $PV_{\rm track}^{\rm fraction} > 0.08$ to enrich the sample in those originating from main and satellite bunch backgrounds. The cleaning selections are shown to reduce the backgrounds by many orders of magnitude.

Distribution of $t_{\mathrm{jet}}$ for jets with the full Run 2 dataset in events satisfying the trigger requirements and satisfying $p_T^\mathrm{miss} < 300$. The jets are required to pass an inverted selection of $PV_{\rm track}^{\rm fraction} > 0.08$ to enrich the sample in those originating from main and satellite bunch backgrounds (all other jet cleaning selections are applied). Clear contributions from jets from satellite bunch collisions can be seen peaked around -5, 5 and 10 ns.

Contribution to the delayed time of jets from the $\beta$ of the gluino is plotted against the delay contribution from the difference (assuming straight line paths) between the path taken by the gluino and the particle forming the jet from the path length for a particle travelling directly to the same position on the ECAL barrel for gluino $c\tau_{0} = 10$ m and mass of 1000 Gev (top) and 3000 GeV (bottom). The dominant contribution is shown to be the gluino $\beta$.

Selection efficiencies for the GMSB model with $m_{\tilde{g}}=1000$ and various proper decay lengths

Selection efficiencies for the GMSB model with $m_{\tilde{g}}=2400$ and various proper decay lengths

Selection efficiencies for the GMSB model with $m_{\tilde{g}}=3000$ and various proper decay lengths

The observed upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section relative to the theoretical cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges from experimental uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

The expected upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section relative to the theoretical cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges from experimental uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

The expected plus 1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{experiment}}$ upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section relative to the theoretical cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges from experimental uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

The expected minus 1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{experiment}}$ upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section relative to the theoretical cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges from experimental uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

The expected upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges from experimental uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

The expected plus 1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{experiment}}$ upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges from experimental uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

The expected minus 1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{experiment}}$ upper limits at $95\%$ CL for the gluino pair production cross section in the GMSB model, shown in the plane of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $c\tau_{0}$. A branching fraction of $100\%$ for the gluino decay to a gluon and a gravitino is assumed. The area below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits and their $\pm 1$ standard deviation ranges from experimental uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties on the signal cross section.

Expected limit contour for GGM scenario

Observed limit contour for GGM scenario

Expected limit contour for GGM scenario

Observed limit contour for GGM scenario

Expected limit contour for Neutralino BF scenario

Observed limit contour for Neutralino BF scenario

Expected limit contour for Chargino BF scenario

Observed limit contour for Chargino BF scenario

Expected limit contour for T5Wg

Observed limit contour for T5Wg

Expected limit contour for Gluino BF scenario

Observed limit contour for Gluino BF scenario

Covariance matrix for all bins (additional material)

Correlation matrix for all bins (additional material)

2-dimensional aTGC limits in lepton + jet events in WW and WZ production

2-dimensional aTGC limits in lepton + jet events in WW and WZ production

2-dimensional aTGC limits in LEP paramatrization in lepton + jet events in WW and WZ production

2-dimensional aTGC limits in LEP paramatrization in lepton + jet events in WW and WZ production

2-dimensional aTGC limits in LEP paramatrization in lepton + jet events in WW and WZ production

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level top quark rapidity

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level charged lepton rapidity

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level charged lepton rapidity

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level cosine of the top quark polarisation angle

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the parton-level cosine of the top quark polarisation angle

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level top quark rapidity

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level top quark rapidity

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level charged lepton rapidity

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level charged lepton rapidity

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level cosine of the top quark polarisation angle

Covariance of the differential absolute cross section as a function of the particle-level cosine of the top quark polarisation angle

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level top quark rapidity

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level top quark rapidity

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level charged lepton rapidity

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level charged lepton rapidity

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level cosine of the top quark polarisation angle

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the parton-level cosine of the top quark polarisation angle

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level top quark rapidity

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level top quark rapidity

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level charged lepton rapidity

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level charged lepton rapidity

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level cosine of the top quark polarisation angle

Covariance of the differential normalised cross section as a function of the particle-level cosine of the top quark polarisation angle

Differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level top quark rapidity

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level top quark rapidity

Differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level charged lepton rapidity

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level charged lepton rapidity

Differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the parton-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level top quark $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level top quark rapidity

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level top quark rapidity

Differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level charged lepton $p_\textrm{T}$

Differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level charged lepton rapidity

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level charged lepton rapidity

Differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Covariance of the differential charge ratio as a function of the particle-level W boson $p_\textrm{T}$

Top quark spin asymmetry at the parton level in the muon and electron channel and their combination

Measured normalized differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of $\cosθ^{*}_{\mathrm{Z}}$, compared to the predictions obtained with the MadGraph5_aMC@NLO MC simulation.

Covariance matrix of the measured absolute differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of the transverse momentum of the Z boson.

Correlation matrix of the measured absolute differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of the transverse momentum of the Z boson.

Covariance matrix of the measured normalized differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of the transverse momentum of the Z boson.

Correlation matrix of the measured normalized differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of the transverse momentum of the Z boson.

Covariance matrix of the measured absolute differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of $\cosθ^{*}_{\mathrm{Z}}$.

Correlation matrix of the measured absolute differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of $\cosθ^{*}_{\mathrm{Z}}$.

Covariance matrix of the measured normalized differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of $\cosθ^{*}_{\mathrm{Z}}$.

Correlation matrix of the measured normalized differential tt̄Z production cross section in the full phase space as a function of $\cosθ^{*}_{\mathrm{Z}}$.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy scalar boson mass, for a relative width of 5.0%.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy scalar boson mass, for a relative width of 10.0%.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy scalar boson mass, for a relative width of 25.0%.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy pseudoscalar boson mass, for a relative width of 0.5%.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy pseudoscalar boson mass, for a relative width of 1.0%.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy pseudoscalar boson mass, for a relative width of 2.5%.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy pseudoscalar boson mass, for a relative width of 5.0%.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy pseudoscalar boson mass, for a relative width of 10.0%.

Model-independent constraints on the coupling strength modifier as a function of the heavy pseudoscalar boson mass, for a relative width of 25.0%.

Exclusion in the (mA, tan beta) plane of the hMSSM. Both H and A boson signals are included with masses and widths that correspond to a given point in the plane.

$\mathrm{M_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution for the $\mathrm{e}\mu$ control region.

$\mathrm{M_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution for the WZ control region.

$\mathrm{M_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution for the ZZ control region.

$\mathrm{M_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution for the signal region, events with $|\eta_{\gamma}|<1$.

$\mathrm{M_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution for the signal region, events with $|\eta_{\gamma}|>1$.

Muon reconstruction, identification, and isolation efficiency as a function of $|\eta|$ and $\mathrm{p_\mathrm{T}}$.

Electron reconstruction, identification, and isolation efficiency as a function of $|\eta|$ and $\mathrm{p_\mathrm{T}}$.

Photon efficiency as a function of $|\eta|$ and $\mathrm{p_\mathrm{T}}$.

Covariance matrix for all bins used in the analysis. There are 45 bins in total, 15 for every data-taking year. For every year, the first bin corresponds to events in the $\mathrm{e}\mu$ control region, the following five bins correspond to events with $|\eta^\gamma|< 1$ in the signal region, the next five bins correspond to events with $|\eta^\gamma|> 1$ in the signal region, the next two bins correspond to events in the WZ control region, and finally the last two bins correspond to events in the ZZ control region.

Observed yields and pre-fit background predictions for Njets 8-9.

Observed yields and pre-fit background predictions for Njets >=10.

Observed yields and pre-fit background predictions for aggregated bins.

Pre-fit background covariance matrix $\sigma_{xy}$ for the 174 analysis bins.

Pre-fit background correlation matrix $\rho_{xy}$ for the 174 analysis bins.

Observed yields and post-fit background predictions for Njets 2-3.

Observed yields and post-fit background predictions for Njets 4-5.

Observed yields and post-fit background predictions for Njets 6-7.

Observed yields and post-fit background predictions for Njets 8-9.

Observed yields and post-fit background predictions for Njets >=10.

Simulated signal yields for representative gluino signal model light-LSP points in the aggregate search regions. The uncertainties shown are statistical.

Simulated signal yields for representative gluino signal model compressed points in the aggregate search regions. The uncertainties shown are statistical.

Simulated signal yields for representative squark signal model light-LSP points in the aggregate search regions. The uncertainties shown are statistical.

Simulated signal yields for representative squark signal model compressed points in the aggregate search regions. The uncertainties shown are statistical.

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the production cross sections of the T1tttt signal model as a function of the gluino and LSP masses.

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the production cross sections of the T1bbbb signal model as a function of the gluino and LSP masses.

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the production cross sections of the T1qqqq signal model as a function of the gluino and LSP masses.

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the production cross sections of the T5qqqqVV signal model as a function of the gluino and LSP masses.

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the production cross sections of the T2tt signal model as a function of the top squark and LSP masses.

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the production cross sections of the T2bb signal model as a function of the bottom squark and LSP masses.

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the production cross sections of the T2qq signal model as a function of the LSP and light squark masses.

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (u d s c)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (u d s c)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (u d s c)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (u d s c)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (u d s c)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (u d s c)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (u d s c)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (single flavor)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (single flavor)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (single flavor)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (single flavor)

Exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NNLO+NNLL cross sections (single flavor)

The observed significance of the SMS models for T1tttt as function of the gluino and LSP masses.

The observed significance of the SMS models for T1bbbb as function of the gluino and LSP masses.

The observed significance of the SMS models for T1qqqq as function of the gluino and LSP masses.

The observed significance of the SMS models for T5qqqqVV as function of the gluino and LSP masses.

The observed significance of the SMS models for T2tt as function of the top squark and LSP masses.

The observed significance of the SMS models for T2bb as function of the bottom squark and LSP masses.

The observed significance of the SMS models for T2qq as function of the LSP and light squark masses.

The efficiency times acceptance of the SMS models for T1tttt as function of the gluino and LSP masses. The efficiency times acceptance is given for the total signal across the set of 174 search regions.

The efficiency times acceptance of the SMS models for T1bbbb as function of the gluino and LSP masses. The efficiency times acceptance is given for the total signal across the set of 174 search regions.

The efficiency times acceptance of the SMS models for T1qqqq as function of the gluino and LSP masses. The efficiency times acceptance is given for the total signal across the set of 174 search regions.

The efficiency times acceptance of the SMS models for T5qqqqVV as function of the gluino and LSP masses. The efficiency times acceptance is given for the total signal across the set of 174 search regions.

The efficiency times acceptance of the SMS models for T2tt as function of the top squark and LSP masses. The efficiency times acceptance is given for the total signal across the set of 174 search regions.

The efficiency times acceptance of the SMS models for T2bb as function of the bottom squark and LSP masses. The efficiency times acceptance is given for the total signal across the set of 174 search regions.

The efficiency times acceptance of the SMS models for T2qq as function of the LSP and light squark masses. The efficiency times acceptance is given for the total signal across the set of 174 search regions.

Absolute cumulative efficiencies in percent for each step of the event selection process, listed for four representative gluino pair production signal models with m(gluino) >> m(LSP). Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Absolute cumulative efficiencies in percent for each step of the event selection process, listed for four representative gluino pair production signal models with m(gluino) ~ m(LSP). Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Absolute cumulative efficiencies in percent for each step of the event selection process, listed for three representative squark pair production signal models with m(squark) >> m(LSP). Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Absolute cumulative efficiencies in percent for each step of the event selection process, listed for three representative squark pair production signal models with m(squark) ~ m(LSP). Only statistical uncertainties are shown.