Distributions of $s_{\text{T}}$ in the single-tau one-bin SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.

Distributions of $m_{\text{T}}(\tau)$ in the single-tau one-bin SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.

Distributions of $\Sigma m_{\text{T}}(b_{1,2})$ in the single-tau $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$-binned SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.

Distributions of $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$ in the single-tau $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$-binned SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.

Observed event yields in data ('Observed') and expected event yields for SM background processes obtained from the background-only fit ('Total bkg.' and rows below) in the signal regions of the di-tau and single-tau channels. The quoted uncertainties include both the statistical and systematic uncertainties and are truncated at zero yield. By construction, no $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) events can pass the selections in the single-tau channel. As the individual uncertainties are correlated, they do not add in quadrature to equal the total background uncertainty.

From left to right: upper limits at the 95% confidence level (CL) on the visible cross section ($\sigma_\text{vis}$) and on the number of signal events ($S_{\text{obs}}^{95}$). The third column ($S_{\text{exp}}^{95}$) shows the upper limit at the 95% CL on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and $\pm 1\,\sigma$ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis ($\text{CL}_{b}$), the discovery $p$-value ($p(s=0)$) and the significance ($Z$). In the di-tau SR, where fewer events are observed than predicted by the fitted background estimate, the $p$-value is capped at 0.5.

Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for the minimal-coupling scenario. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region.

Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for the minimal-coupling scenario. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region.

Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for vector leptoquarks with additional gauge couplings. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region.

Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for vector leptoquarks with additional gauge couplings. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region.

Exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the stop-stau signal model as a function of the masses of the top squark $m(\tilde{t}_{1})$ and of the tau slepton $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1})$. Expected and observed limits are shown for the present search in comparison to observed limits from previous ATLAS analyses based on data from Run-1 of the LHC at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV [Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016)] and on a partial dataset from Run 2 at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV [Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 032008]. The green band indicates the limit on the mass of the tau slepton (for a massless LSP) from the LEP experiments.

Exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the stop-stau signal model as a function of the masses of the top squark $m(\tilde{t}_{1})$ and of the tau slepton $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1})$. Expected and observed limits are shown for the present search in comparison to observed limits from previous ATLAS analyses based on data from Run-1 of the LHC at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV [Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016)] and on a partial dataset from Run 2 at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV [Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 032008]. The green band indicates the limit on the mass of the tau slepton (for a massless LSP) from the LEP experiments.

Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}})$ with charge $+2/3e$. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region. Shown in gray for comparison are the observed exclusion-limit contours from the previous ATLAS publication that targets the same leptoquark models but is based on a subset of the Run-2 data [JHEP 06 (2019) 144]. In this previous publication five different analyses are considered that target not only the final state studied here but also the final states that correspond to a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ of 0 or 1, leading to the concave shapes of the gray exclusion contours.

Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}})$ with charge $+2/3e$. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region. Shown in gray for comparison are the observed exclusion-limit contours from the previous ATLAS publication that targets the same leptoquark models but is based on a subset of the Run-2 data [JHEP 06 (2019) 144]. In this previous publication five different analyses are considered that target not only the final state studied here but also the final states that correspond to a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ of 0 or 1, leading to the concave shapes of the gray exclusion contours.

Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}})$ with charge $-1/3e$. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region. Shown in gray for comparison are the observed exclusion-limit contours from the previous ATLAS publication that targets the same leptoquark models but is based on a subset of the Run-2 data [JHEP 06 (2019) 144]. In this previous publication five different analyses are considered that target not only the final state studied here but also the final states that correspond to a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ of 0 or 1, leading to the concave shapes of the gray exclusion contours.

Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}})$ with charge $-1/3e$. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region. Shown in gray for comparison are the observed exclusion-limit contours from the previous ATLAS publication that targets the same leptoquark models but is based on a subset of the Run-2 data [JHEP 06 (2019) 144]. In this previous publication five different analyses are considered that target not only the final state studied here but also the final states that correspond to a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ of 0 or 1, leading to the concave shapes of the gray exclusion contours.

Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the stop-stau signal model.

Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model with up-type leptoquarks.

Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model with down-type leptoquarks.

Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model with minimal coupling (MC).

Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model with additional gauge couplings (YM).

Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.

Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.

Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.

Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.

Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.

Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.

Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.

Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.

Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.

Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.

Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.

Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.

Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.

Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.

Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.

Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.

Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.

Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.

Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.

Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.

Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.

Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\tilde{t}_{1}) = 1350$ GeV, $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1}) = 1090$ GeV for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 30,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\tilde{t}_{1}) = 1350$ GeV, $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1}) = 1090$ GeV for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 30,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\tilde{t}_{1}) = 1350$ GeV, $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1}) = 1090$ GeV for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 30,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the minimal-coupling scenario for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the minimal-coupling scenario for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the minimal-coupling scenario for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the Yang--Mills scenario for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the Yang--Mills scenario for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the Yang--Mills scenario for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eleven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eleven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eleven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with twelve-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with twelve-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with twelve-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 40 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with five jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with five jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with five jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 60 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with five jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with five jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with five jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with six jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with seven jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with eight jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with nine jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

The expected background and observed data with ten-or-more jets in the different b-tag multiplicity bins for the 80 GeV jet pT threshold. The background shown is estimated by including all bins in the fit.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Observed exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Expected exclusion contours on the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Observed exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Expected exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Expected exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Expected exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Expected exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Expected exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Expected exclusion contours on the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model where the gluino decays via a virtual top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino --> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a third-generation quark and a higgsino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the stop and neutralino masses in a model where the stop decays to a top and a bino-like neutralino, which decays via the RPV coupling lambda''_323.

Acceptance as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Acceptance as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Acceptance as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Efficiency as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Efficiency as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Efficiency as a function of the gluino and stop masses in a model where the gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s-quark and a b-quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling.

Acceptance as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Acceptance as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Acceptance as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Efficiency as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Efficiency as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Efficiency as a function of the gluino and neutralino masses in a model with a gluino decaying to two light quarks (q=u,d,s,c) and the neutralino, which then decays to two light quarks and a charged lepton or a neutrino.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where the gluino decays to two (u, d, s, c) quarks and the neutralino, which then decays to two (u, d, s, c) quarks and a lepton via a lambda' RPV coupling, where each RPV decay can produce any of the four first and second generation leptons (e, mu, nu_e, nu_mu) with equal probability (m_gluino = 1800 GeV, m_neutralino = 900 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where the gluino decays to two (u, d, s, c) quarks and the neutralino, which then decays to two (u, d, s, c) quarks and a lepton via a lambda' RPV coupling, where each RPV decay can produce any of the four first and second generation leptons (e, mu, nu_e, nu_mu) with equal probability (m_gluino = 1800 GeV, m_neutralino = 900 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where the gluino decays to two (u, d, s, c) quarks and the neutralino, which then decays to two (u, d, s, c) quarks and a lepton via a lambda' RPV coupling, where each RPV decay can produce any of the four first and second generation leptons (e, mu, nu_e, nu_mu) with equal probability (m_gluino = 1800 GeV, m_neutralino = 900 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where each gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s- and a b- quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling (m_gluino = 1600 GeV, m_stop = 1000 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where each gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s- and a b- quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling (m_gluino = 1600 GeV, m_stop = 1000 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where each gluino decays to a top quark and a top squark, with the top squark decaying to an s- and a b- quark via a non-zero lambda''_323 RPV coupling (m_gluino = 1600 GeV, m_stop = 1000 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where each gluino decays via an off-shell top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino -> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112 (m_gluino = 2000 GeV, m_neutralino = 941 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where each gluino decays via an off-shell top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino -> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112 (m_gluino = 2000 GeV, m_neutralino = 941 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of gluino pair production where each gluino decays via an off-shell top squark to two top quarks and the lightest neutralino, with the neutralino decaying to three light quarks (neutralino -> uds) via the RPV coupling lambda''_112 (m_gluino = 2000 GeV, m_neutralino = 941 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of right-handed top squark pair production with the top squark decaying to the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) which is considered to be purely higgsino. The higgsino-like LSP decays through the non-zero RPV coupling lambda''_323 (m_stop = 975 GeV, m_neutralino = 600 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of right-handed top squark pair production with the top squark decaying to the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) which is considered to be purely higgsino. The higgsino-like LSP decays through the non-zero RPV coupling lambda''_323 (m_stop = 975 GeV, m_neutralino = 600 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

Cut flow for a model of right-handed top squark pair production with the top squark decaying to the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) which is considered to be purely higgsino. The higgsino-like LSP decays through the non-zero RPV coupling lambda''_323 (m_stop = 975 GeV, m_neutralino = 600 GeV). The events are skimmed by requiring at least one electron or muon that satisfies very loose identification criteria, where the lepton satisfies pT > 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.

The number of events as a function of the dijet invariant mass, compared to background prediction from fit and corresponding uncertainties, in the region defined by |y*|<1.2 optimized for the W* search.

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [3.4-3.7] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [3.4-3.7] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [3.7-4.0] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [3.7-4.0] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [4.0-4.3] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [4.0-4.3] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [4.3-4.6] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [4.3-4.6] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [4.6-4.9] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [4.6-4.9] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [4.9-5.4] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in [4.9-5.4] TeV dijet invariant mass region

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in dijet invariant mass region above 5.4 TeV

The number of events normalized to bin width as a function of the chi angular separation between the two jets, compared to background prediction from Monte Carlo simulation and corresponding uncertainties, in dijet invariant mass region above 5.4 TeV

HT inclusive distribution in SRZ.

Jet multiplicity distribution in SRZ.

B-tagged jet multiplicity distribution in SRZ.

Dilepton invariant mass distribution in SRMedium.

Dilepton invariant mass distribution in SRMedium.

Dilepton invariant mass in SRHigh.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with fixed N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with fixed N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the squark simplified model with fixed N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the squark simplified model with fixed N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with varying N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with varying N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with sleptons in the edge SRs.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with sleptons in the edge SRs.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with decays to on- or off-shell Z bosons in the edge SRs.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with decays to on- or off-shell Z bosons in the edge SRs.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with decays to on- or off-shell Z bosons in SRZ.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the gluino simplified model with decays to on- or off-shell Z bosons in SRZ.

Cutflow table for three benchmark signal points from the $\tilde{g}$--$\chi_{2}^{0}$ on-shell grid in SRZ for the $ee$ and $\mu\mu$ channels separately. The number of generated events is N RAW, while N WEIGHTED corresponds to the number of events expected in 14.7/fb, after all MC simulation corrections have been applied.

Cutflow table for three benchmark signal points for the slepton model in SR-low, SR-medium and SR-high for the $ee$ and $\mu\mu$ channels separately. The number of generated events is N RAW, while N WEIGHTED corresponds to the number of events expected in 14.7/fb, after all MC simulation corrections have been applied. The event generation was filtered to require at least two leptons (electrons or muons) with $p_{T}>5$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.8$, with 20000 events required to pass the filter. The corresponding number of unfiltered events is provided in the ``Pre-filter events'' row of the table.

Signal acceptance for the gluino simplified model with decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Signal efficiency for the gluino simplified model with decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Signal acceptance for the gluino simplified model with decays via sleptons in SRLow.

Signal efficiency for the gluino simplified model with decays via sleptons in SRLow.

Signal acceptance for the gluino simplified model with decays via sleptons in SRMedium.

Signal efficiency for the gluino simplified model with decays via sleptons in SRMedium.

Signal acceptance for the gluino simplified model with decays via sleptons in SRHigh.

Signal efficiency for the gluino simplified model with decays via sleptons in SRHigh.

Upper limits on the signal cross-section at 95% CL for the gluino simplified model with fixed N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Upper limits on the signal cross-section at 95% CL for the squark simplified model with fixed N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Upper limits on the signal cross-section at 95% CL for the gluino simplified model with varying N1 mass and decays to quarks and Z bosons in SRZ.

Upper limits on the signal cross-section at 95% CL for the gluino simplified model with decays via sleptons.

Upper limits on the signal cross-section at 95% CL for the gluino simplified model with decays to on-shell or off-shell Z bosons.

Distribution of missing transverse momentum in the data and for the background in the PhJetCR. The total background expectation is normali zed to the post-fit result. The errors include both statistical and systematic uncertainties determined by a bin-by-bin fit.

Distribution of missing transverse momentum in the signal region for data and for the background predicted from the fit in the CRs. Overflows are included in the final bin. The errors include both statistical and systematic components. The expected yield of events from the simplified model with $m_\chi$ = 150 GeV and $m_{med}$ = 500 GeV is also shown.

Distribution of photon transverse momentum in the signal region for data and for the background predicted from the fit in the CRs. Overflows are included in the final bin. The errors include both statistical and systematic components. The expected yield of events from the simplified model with $m_\chi$ = 150 GeV and $m_{med}$ = 500 GeV is also shown.

The observed and 95% CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_q$ = 0.25 and $g_\chi$ = 1 as a function of the dark matter mass $m_\chi$ and the axial-mediator mass $m_{med}$.

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

The observed 95% CL lower limits on $M_\ast$ for a dimension-7 operator EFT model with a contact interaction of type $\gamma\gamma\chi\chi$ as a function of dark matter mass $m_\chi$.

The observed 95% CL lower limits on the mass scale $M_D$ in the ADD models of large extra dimensions, for several values of the number of extra dimensions.

Distribution of ETmiss in the signal region for data and for the background predicted from the fit in the CRs. Overflows are included in the final bin.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the vector operator D5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the axial-vector operator D8. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the tensor operator D9. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-independent and spin-dependent interactions, for a coupling strength g = sqrt(g_f g_chi) of unity or the maximum value (4 pi) that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 95% C.L. on the WIMP simplified model coupling parameter, sqrt(g_f g_chi), with vector coupling and mediator width Gamma=m_V/3, as a function of WIMP (m_chi) and the mediator particle (m_V) masses.

Observed lower limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass mV, for a Z'-like mediator with vector interactions. For a dark-matter mass m_chi of 50 or 400 GeV, results are shown for different values of the mediator total decay width Gamma.

Observed lower limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass mV, for a Z'-like mediator with axial-vector interactions. For a dark-matter mass m_chi of 50 or 400 GeV, results are shown for different values of the mediator total decay width Gamma.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the effective mass scale M* in the (k2, k1) parameter plane for the s-channel EFT model inspired by Fermi-LAT gamma-ray line, for m_chi = 130 GeV. The upper part of the plane is excluded.

Lower limits at 95% C.L. on the mass scale M_D in the ADD models of large extra dimensions, for several values of the number of extra dimensions.

Upper limits at 95% C.L. on the cross section for the compressed squark model, as a function of the squark mass, m_squark, and of the difference between the squark mass and the mass of the neutralino, m_squark-m_neutralino, in the compressed region of m_squark-m_neutralino < 50 GeV.

The measured $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{recoil}}$ distributions in the top control region, compared with the background predictions as estimated after the simultaneous, binned background-only fit to the data in the control regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

The measured $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{recoil}}$ distributions in the $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ control region, compared with the background predictions as estimated after the simultaneous, binned background-only fit to the data in the control regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

The measured $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{recoil}}$ distributions in the $Z\rightarrow ee$ control region, compared with the background predictions as estimated after the simultaneous, binned background-only fit to the data in the control regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

The measured $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{recoil}}$ distributions in the signal region, compared with the background predictions as estimated after the simultaneous, binned background-only fit to the data in the control regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{A}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the axial-vector mediator model.

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ up observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{A}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the axial-vector mediator model.

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ down observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{A}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the axial-vector mediator model.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{A}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the axial-vector mediator model.

1 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{A}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the axial-vector mediator model.

1 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{A}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the axial-vector mediator model.

2 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{A}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the axial-vector mediator model.

2 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{A}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the axial-vector mediator model.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{P}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the pseudo-scalar mediator model.

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ up observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{P}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the pseudo-scalar mediator model.

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ down observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{P}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the pseudo-scalar mediator model.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{P}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the pseudo-scalar mediator model.

1 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{P}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the pseudo-scalar mediator model.

1 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{P}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the pseudo-scalar mediator model.

2 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{P}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the pseudo-scalar mediator model.

2 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{P}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the pseudo-scalar mediator model.

A comparison of the inferred limits with the constraints from direct-detection experiments on the spin-dependent WIMP-neutron and WIMP-proton scattering cross section as a function of the WIMP mass, in the context of the simplified model with axial-vector couplings. Limits are shown at 90% CL.

Observed excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to c + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ up observed excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to c + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ down observed excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to c + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

Expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to c + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma$ up expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to c + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma$ down expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to c + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

2 $\sigma$ up expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to c + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

2 $\sigma$ down expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to c + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

Observed excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to b + ff^{'} + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ up observed excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to b + ff^{'} + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ down observed excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to b + ff^{'} + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

Expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to b + ff^{'} + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma$ up expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to b + ff^{'} + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma$ down expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to b + ff^{'} + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

2 $\sigma$ up expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to b + ff^{'} + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

2 $\sigma$ down expected excluded regions at the 95% CL in the ($\tilde{t}_1,\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$)mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_1 \to b + ff^{'} + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

Observed exclusion plane at 95% CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_1 \to b + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ up observed exclusion plane at 95% CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_1 \to b + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ down observed exclusion plane at 95% CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_1 \to b + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

Expected exclusion plane at 95% CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_1 \to b + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion plane at 95% CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_1 \to b + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

1 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion plane at 95% CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_1 \to b + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

2 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion plane at 95% CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_1 \to b + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

2 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion plane at 95% CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_1 \to b + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ($\mathcal{B}=100\%$)

Observed exclusion region at 95$\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark--neutralino massdifference for $\tilde{q} \to q + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{q}_\mathrm{L} + \tilde{q}_\mathrm{R}$with ($\tilde{u},\tilde{d},\tilde{c},\tilde{s}$).

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ up observed exclusion region at 95$\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark--neutralino massdifference for $\tilde{q} \to q + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{q}_\mathrm{L} + \tilde{q}_\mathrm{R}$with ($\tilde{u},\tilde{d},\tilde{c},\tilde{s}$).

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ down observed exclusion region at 95$\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark--neutralino massdifference for $\tilde{q} \to q + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{q}_\mathrm{L} + \tilde{q}_\mathrm{R}$with ($\tilde{u},\tilde{d},\tilde{c},\tilde{s}$).

Expected exclusion region at 95$\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark--neutralino massdifference for $\tilde{q} \to q + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{q}_\mathrm{L} + \tilde{q}_\mathrm{R}$with ($\tilde{u},\tilde{d},\tilde{c},\tilde{s}$).

1 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion region at 95$\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark--neutralino massdifference for $\tilde{q} \to q + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{q}_\mathrm{L} + \tilde{q}_\mathrm{R}$with ($\tilde{u},\tilde{d},\tilde{c},\tilde{s}$).

1 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion region at 95$\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark--neutralino massdifference for $\tilde{q} \to q + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{q}_\mathrm{L} + \tilde{q}_\mathrm{R}$with ($\tilde{u},\tilde{d},\tilde{c},\tilde{s}$).

2 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion region at 95$\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark--neutralino massdifference for $\tilde{q} \to q + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{q}_\mathrm{L} + \tilde{q}_\mathrm{R}$with ($\tilde{u},\tilde{d},\tilde{c},\tilde{s}$).

2 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion region at 95$\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark--neutralino massdifference for $\tilde{q} \to q + \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{q}_\mathrm{L} + \tilde{q}_\mathrm{R}$with ($\tilde{u},\tilde{d},\tilde{c},\tilde{s}$).

Observed and expected exclusions at $95\%$ CL on the Horndeski dark-energy model for $m_{\phi}=0.1$ GeV and $c_{i\neq 2}=0$, $c_{2}=1$, expressed in terms of the visible cross section as a function of the suppression scale $M_{2}$.

$95\%$ CL observed and expected lower limits on the fundamental Planck scale in $4+n$ dimensions, $M_D$, as a function of the number of extra dimensions $n$, considering nominal LO signal cross sections.

Observed and expected 95$\%$ CL upper limits on the coupling $c_{\stackrel{\sim}{\smash{G}}}$ as a function of the effective scale $f_a$ for ALP mass of 1 MeV. The bands indicate the $\pm 1\sigma$ theory uncertainties in the observed limit and the $\pm 1\sigma$and $\pm 2\sigma$ ranges of the expected limit in the absence of a signal. The 95$\%$ CL limits are computed with no suppression of the events with $\hat{s} > f_a^2$.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{V}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the vector mediator model.

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ up observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{V}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the vector mediator model.

1 $\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{PDF+scale}}$ down observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{V}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the vector mediator model.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{V}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the vector mediator model.

1 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{V}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the vector mediator model.

1 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{V}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the vector mediator model.

2 $\sigma$ up expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{V}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the vector mediator model.

2 $\sigma$ down expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the $m_{Z_{V}}-m_\chi$ parameter plane for the vector mediator model.

A comparison of the inferred limits with the constraints from direct-detection experiments on the spin-independent WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of the WIMP mass, in the context of the simplified model with vector couplings. Limits are shown at 90% CL.

Inferred 95% CL limits on the WIMP annihilation rate as a function of WIMP mass, for the pseudoscalar mediator model. The annihilation rate is defined as the product of cross section $\sigma$ and relative velocity $v_{rel}$, averaged over the DM velocity distribution ($\langle\sigma v_{rel}\rangle$). Both the $qq$ and $gg$ annihilation channels are considered in the calculation of the annihilation rate

Contribution to the total SR background uncertainty in exclusive bins of the SR, as obtained from the CR-only fit. In the table, the contribution of each source of systematic is shown as the sum in quadrature of the individual contributions represented by the corresponding nuisance parameters.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM0.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM1.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM2.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM3.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM4.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM5.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM6.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM7.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM8.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM9.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM10.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM11.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the exclusive SR bin EM12.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM0.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM1.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM2.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM3.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM4.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM5.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM6.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM7.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM8.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM9.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM10.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM11.

Expected and observed backgrounds, before and after a binned likelihood fit in the control regions, in the inclusive SR IM12.

Cutflow of several signal benchmarks. A cut on the truth $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ at 150 GeV is applied.

Cutflow of several signal benchmarks. A cut on the truth $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ at 350 GeV is applied.

Expected and observed limits on vector-like T-quark pair production as a function of mass, assuming the branching ratios expected in the singlet model.

Mass hypotheses excluded at 95% CL as a function of the branching ratio, expected and observed limits for a vector-like B-quark.

Mass hypotheses excluded at 95% CL as a function of the branching ratio, expected and observed limits for a vector-like B-quark.

Mass hypotheses excluded at 95% CL as a function of the branching ratio, expected and observed limits for a vector-like T-quark.

Mass hypotheses excluded at 95% CL as a function of the branching ratio, expected and observed limits for a vector-like T-quark.

Expected and observed limits on vector-like T5/3 pair production as a function of mass, assuming a branching ratio B(T5/3 -> Wt) = 100%.

Expected and observed limits on vector-like T5/3 pair production as a function of mass, assuming a branching ratio B(T5/3 -> Wt) = 100%.

Expected and observed limits on vector-like T5/3 single- plus pair-production as a function of mass and T5/3tW coupling assuming a branching ratio B(T5/3 -> Wt) = 100%.

Expected and observed limits on vector-like T5/3 single- plus pair-production as a function of mass and T5/3tW coupling assuming a branching ratio B(T5/3 -> Wt) = 100%.

Expected and observed limits on photon KK excitation pair-production as a function of the KK excitation mass of the photon in the 2UED/RPP model assuming a branching ratio B(A(1,1)-> t tbar)) = 100%.

Expected and observed limits on photon KK excitation pair-production as a function of the KK excitation mass of the photon in the 2UED/RPP model assuming a branching ratio B(A(1,1)-> t tbar)) = 100%.

Expected and observed limits on the cross-section of the four-top-quark production through a heavy scalar Higgs boson times the branching ratio for the Higgs boson to decay into t tbar as a function of the heavy scalar Higgs mass.

Expected and observed limits on the cross-section of the four-top-quark production through a heavy scalar Higgs boson times the branching ratio for the Higgs boson to decay into t tbar as a function of the heavy scalar Higgs mass.

Expected and observed limits on the cross-section for prompt tt production as a function of the mass of the exotic FCNC mediator particle in a dark matter model.

Expected and observed limits on the cross-section for prompt tt production as a function of the mass of the exotic FCNC mediator particle in a dark matter model.

Expected and observed limits on the cross-section for on-shell mediator subprocesses of the same-sign top-quark pair production as a function of the mass of the exotic FCNC mediator particle in a dark matter model.

Expected and observed limits on the cross-section for on-shell mediator subprocesses of the same-sign top-quark pair production as a function of the mass of the exotic FCNC mediator particle in a dark matter model.

Expected and observed limits on the cross-section for off-shell mediator subprocesses of the same-sign top-quark pair production as a function of the mass of the exotic FCNC mediator particle in a dark matter model.

Expected and observed limits on the cross-section for off-shell mediator subprocesses of the same-sign top-quark pair production as a function of the mass of the exotic FCNC mediator particle in a dark matter model.

Expected and observed constraints in the (gSM, mV) plane for the combined visible same-sign top-quark pair production for gSM=0.1

Expected and observed constraints in the (gSM, mV) plane for the combined visible same-sign top-quark pair production for gSM=0.1

Expected and observed constraints in the (gSM, mV) plane for the combined visible same-sign top-quark pair production for gSM=0.5

Expected and observed constraints in the (gSM, mV) plane for the combined visible same-sign top-quark pair production for gSM=0.5

Expected and observed constraints in the (gSM, mV) plane for the combined visible same-sign top-quark pair production for gSM=1.0

Expected and observed constraints in the (gSM, mV) plane for the combined visible same-sign top-quark pair production for gSM=1.0

Results for the H_T^leptons signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the H_T^leptons signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the H_T^leptons signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the H_T^leptons signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the E_T^miss, H_T^jets<100 GeV signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the E_T^miss, H_T^jets<100 GeV signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the E_T^miss, H_T^jets<100 GeV signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the E_T^miss, H_T^jets<100 GeV signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the E_T^miss, H_T^jets>=100 GeV signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the E_T^miss, H_T^jets>=100 GeV signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the E_T^miss, H_T^jets>=100 GeV signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the E_T^miss, H_T^jets>=100 GeV signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the m_eff signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the m_eff signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the m_eff signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the m_eff signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the m_eff, E_T^miss>=75 GeV signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the m_eff, E_T^miss>=75 GeV signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the m_eff, E_T^miss>=75 GeV signal regions for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Results for the m_eff, E_T^miss>=75 GeV signal regions for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events. Irreducible sources include all backgrounds estimated with MC simulation. Results are presented in number of expected events as N +- (statistical uncertainty) +- (systematic uncertainty).

Limits in the H_T^leptons bins, for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events, shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the H_T^leptons bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events, shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the H_T^leptons bins, for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events, shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the H_T^leptons bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events, shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the E_T^miss bins, for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events, with H_T^jets<100 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the E_T^miss bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events, with H_T^jets<100 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the E_T^miss bins, for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events, with H_T^jets<100 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the E_T^miss bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events, with H_T^jets<100 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the E_T^miss bins, for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events, with H_T^jets>=100 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the E_T^miss bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events, with H_T^jets>=100 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the E_T^miss bins, for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events, with H_T^jets>=100 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the E_T^miss bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events, with H_T^jets>=100 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the m_eff bins, for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events, shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the m_eff bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events, shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the m_eff bins, for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events, shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the m_eff bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events, shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the m_eff bins, for the >= 3 e/mu off-Z events, with E_T^miss>=75 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the m_eff bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had off-Z events, with E_T^miss>=75 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the m_eff bins, for the >= 3 e/mu on-Z events, with E_T^miss>=75 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

Limits in the m_eff bins, for the 2 e/mu + >= 1 tau_had on-Z events, with E_T^miss>=75 GeV requirement shown as the upper limit on the visible cross section sigma^vis_95 = N_95/int(Ldt).

The fiducial efficiency for electrons and taus in different $\eta$ ranges ($\epsilon_{\mathrm{fid}}(\eta)$). For electrons from tau decays, the $\eta$ is that of the electron, not the tau. The uncertainties shown reflect the statistical uncertainties of the simulated samples only. UPDATE (18 MAY 2015): Updated fiducial lepton efficiencies.

Expected and observed event yields for the $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{leptons}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the minimum $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the $b$-tag signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the inclusive $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$, $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$m_{\mathrm{T}}^{W}$, $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}$, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the low-$H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}$, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{leptons}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell\mathrm{,min}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on the number of $b$-tagged jets.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ [GeV]. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}\geq 100$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ [GeV]. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{W}\geq 100$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}\geq 150$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}} < 150$ GeV.