Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|y_{e u}|$, versus $S_{e u}$ mass for scalar LQs coupled to electrons.

Observed and Expected UL exclusions on the $BR(H\to S)$ of generic signals with $m_{A'} = 1.0\;GeV$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 1.0$.

The observed data in the dielectron channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $S_{e d}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Observed and Expected UL exclusions on the number of 'signal' yields in sideband A from the model agnostic fit, assuming no 'SUEP-like' signal contamination in the CRs.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|y_{e d}|$, versus $S_{e d}$ mass for scalar LQs coupled to electrons.

Postfit values for SR in the B-Only CR+SR and CR-Only fits with the prefit signal overlayed for reference

The observed data in the dimuon channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $S_{\mu u}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Postfit values for PR in the B-Only CR+SR and CR-Only fits with the prefit signal overlayed for reference

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|y_{\mu u}|$, versus $S_{\mu u}$ mass for scalar LQs coupled to muons.

Postfit values for CRDY in the B-Only CR+SR and CR-Only fits with the prefit signal overlayed for reference

The observed data in the dimuon channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $S_{\mu d}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Postfit values for CRTT in the B-Only CR+SR and CR-Only fits with the prefit signal overlayed for reference

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|y_{\mu d}|$, versus $S_{\mu d}$ mass for scalar LQs coupled to muons.

Per-selection efficiencies on Generic - $m_{A'} = 1.0\;GeV$ $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 1.0$ Hadronic - $m_{A'} = 0.7\;GeV$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow ee) = BR(A' \rightarrow \mu\mu) = 0.15$ $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 0.7$ Leptonic - $m_{A'} = 0.5\;GeV$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow ee) = BR(A' \rightarrow \mu\mu) = 0.2$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 0.6$ samples. Selections: 2 OSSF leptons, one SUEP cluster, $60\leq Z_{m}\leq 120$ GeV, $p_{T}^Z\geq 25$ GeV, veto events with b-tagged jets, $p_{T}^{SUEP} > 60\;GeV$, and $dR^{Ak4}_{Ak15} < 1.5$. Efficiencies are the ratio of the histogram size at the selection step to the previous step (except twoLepton vs. initial). The final column is the total cumulative efficiency (dR vs. initial). Note that these selection numbers were all calculated using samples generated with 600,000 events for each signal point considered.

The observed data in the dielectron channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $V_{e u}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Interpolated observed and expected UL exclusions on $BR(H\to S) = 1$ for generic signals with $m_{A'} = 1.0\;GeV$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 1.0$. The discreate heatmap points can be found in the UL Generic (Observed & Expected) figure in this sandbox

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|g_{e u}|$, versus $V_{e u}$ mass for vector LQs coupled to electrons.

The observed data in the dielectron channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $V_{e d}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|g_{e d}|$, versus $V_{e d}$ mass for vector LQs coupled to electrons.

The observed data in the dimuon channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $V_{\mu u}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|g_{\mu u}|$, versus $V_{\mu u}$ mass for vector LQs coupled to muons.

The observed data in the dimuon channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $V_{\mu d}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|g_{\mu d}|$, versus $V_{\mu d}$ mass for vector LQs coupled to muons.

Systematic covariance matrix for the differential cross-section distribution.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the SR (t-pass) and SR (t-fail) after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. A representative mono-top signal (vector coupling scenario) with a mediator mass of 1 TeV, a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV, and a cross section of 1 pb is overlaid as an orange line. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the SR (t-pass) and SR (t-fail) after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. A representative mono-top signal (vector coupling scenario) with a mediator mass of 1 TeV, a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV, and a cross section of 1 pb is overlaid as an orange line. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the W(e$\nu$) (t-pass) and W(e$\nu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the W(e$\nu$) (t-pass) and W(e$\nu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the W($\mu\nu$) (t-pass) and W($\mu\nu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the W($\mu\nu$) (t-pass) and W($\mu\nu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the Z(ee) (t-pass) and Z(ee) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the Z(ee) (t-pass) and Z(ee) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the Z($\mu\mu$) (t-pass) and Z($\mu\mu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the Z($\mu\mu$) (t-pass) and Z($\mu\mu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the t$\bar{t}$ (e$\nu$) (t-pass) and t$\bar{t}$ (e$\nu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the t$\bar{t}$ (e$\nu$) (t-pass) and t$\bar{t}$ (e$\nu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the tt ($\mu\nu$) (t-pass) and tt ($\mu\nu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the tt ($\mu\nu$) (t-pass) and tt ($\mu\nu$) (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the $\gamma$ (t-pass) and $\gamma$ (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Postfit distributions of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ in the $\gamma$ (t-pass) and $\gamma$ (t-fail) CRs after a fit of the background model to the data. The last bin of each distribution also contains events with $R_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 1000 GeV. The background processes are stacked together. The gray band represents the statistical and postfit systematic uncertainties in the predicted background yields after the fit.

Upper limits at 95% CL on $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ of mono-top production presented in the two- dimensional plane spanned by the mediator and DM candidate masses for a mediator mass between 200 and 2250 GeV and a DM candidate mass between 1 and 1125 GeV only consider- ing on-shell decays of the mediator to the DM candidates. The mediator has vector couplings to quarks and DM candidates in the upper plot and axial-vector couplings in the lower plot. The median expected exclusion range is indicated by a black solid line, demonstrating the search sensitivity of the analysis. The 68% probability interval of the expected exclusion is shown in black dashed lines. Contours of theory predictions for constant values of $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ are shown in gray dashed lines. The observed exclusion contour of mediator and DM candidate masses is rep- resented by the red solid line. The exclusion contour obtained from measurements of the DM relic density $\Omega_{\mathrm{nbm}}h^2$ by the Planck Collaboration is shown in the gray solid line.

Upper limits at 95% CL on $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ of mono-top production presented in the two- dimensional plane spanned by the mediator and DM candidate masses for a mediator mass between 200 and 2250 GeV and a DM candidate mass between 1 and 1125 GeV only consider- ing on-shell decays of the mediator to the DM candidates. The mediator has vector couplings to quarks and DM candidates in the upper plot and axial-vector couplings in the lower plot. The median expected exclusion range is indicated by a black solid line, demonstrating the search sensitivity of the analysis. The 68% probability interval of the expected exclusion is shown in black dashed lines. Contours of theory predictions for constant values of $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ are shown in gray dashed lines. The observed exclusion contour of mediator and DM candidate masses is rep- resented by the red solid line. The exclusion contour obtained from measurements of the DM relic density $\Omega_{\mathrm{nbm}}h^2$ by the Planck Collaboration is shown in the gray solid line.

Observed profile likelihood as a function of $\sigma\times\mathcal{B}_{H\rightarrow WW^{*}}$ normalised by the SM expectation for the single-channel measurements

Two-dimensional likelihood scan of the measured values of $\sigma_{ZH}\times\mathcal{B}_{H\rightarrow WW^{*}}$ vs. $\sigma_{WH}\times\mathcal{B}_{H\rightarrow WW^{*}}$.

The observed values of the background normalisation factors for the combined 2-POI fit. The uncertainties correspond to the total of all statistical and systematic sources.

Measured cross sections times the $H\rightarrow WW^{*}$ branching ratio for the $p_T^V$ scheme.

Measured cross sections times the $H\rightarrow WW^{*}$ branching ratio for the STXS scheme. Note: the uncertainties of "-0" are due to the confidence interval reaching the minimum allowed value of the POI.

Correlation matrix of the POIs and normalisation factors for the 2-POI inclusive analysis

Correlation matrix of the parameters of interest, normalisation factors and nuissance parameters for the $p_T^V$ scheme

Correlation matrix of the parameters of interest, normalisation factors and nuissance parameters for the STXS scheme

Event data from Z-dominated SR

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator distributions constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions and for pp collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 1$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=1$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $120 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 140$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $140 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 160$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $160 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 180$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The energy-energy correlator PbPb/pp ratios constructed with charged particles with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 2$ GeV for energy weight $n=2$ and jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ selection $180 < p_{\mathrm{T,jet}} < 200$ GeV. The results are shown for different centrality bins in PbPb collisions.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}}$ > 1 GeV.

The double ratios of PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 2$ GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} > 1$ GeV.

$\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{K}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{p}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{p}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\pi,\mathrm{K}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\pi,\mathrm{K}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\pi,\mathrm{p}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\pi,\mathrm{p}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\mathrm{p},\mathrm{K}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\mathrm{p},\mathrm{K}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{2}_{\mathrm{Q}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{2}_{\mathrm{Q}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\mathrm{Q},\mathrm{K}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\mathrm{Q},\mathrm{K}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\mathrm{Q},\mathrm{p}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_{\mathrm{Q},\mathrm{p}}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$C_\mathrm{Q,p}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$C_\mathrm{Q,p}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$C_\mathrm{Q,K}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$C_\mathrm{Q,K}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$C_\mathrm{p,K}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$C_\mathrm{p,K}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_\mathrm{Q,p}/\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{Q}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_\mathrm{Q,K}/\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{Q}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$(2\kappa^{11}_\mathrm{Q,K}-\kappa^{11}_\mathrm{p,K})/\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{K}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$(2\kappa^{11}_\mathrm{Q,p}-\kappa^{11}_\mathrm{p,K})/\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{p}$ as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_\mathrm{Q,p}/\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{Q}$ normalized by its value at 0$-$5% centrality as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 1 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

$\kappa^{11}_\mathrm{Q,p}/\kappa^{2}_\mathrm{Q}$ normalized by its value at 0$-$5% centrality as a function of centrality (%) in Pb$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV for Set 2 $p_\mathrm{T}$ acceptance.

The DV reconstruction efficiency for an HNL with $m_N = 2$ GeV and $c\tau_N = 10$ mm, as a function of the DV radius $r_{DV}$ using the customised vertex reconstruction for a selection of the fully leptonic MC samples. Decays from HNLs are shown for $ee$ DVs for HNLs with various masses.

Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

Observed 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model.

Observed 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model.

Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model.

Observed 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model.

Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model.

Observed 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model.

Expected 95% CL for 1SFH $e$ Majorana model.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 1SFH $e$ Majorana model.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Majorana model.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

Observed 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model.

Expected 95% CL for 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model.

Observed 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model.

Expected 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Majorana model.

Observed 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model.

Expected 95% CL for 2QDH IH Majorana model

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 2QDH IH Majorana model.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Majorana model.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Majorana model.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Majorana model.

Observed 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Majorana model.

Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the N mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Observed 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Observed 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Observed 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Observed 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Expected 95% CL for 1SFH $e$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 1SFH $e$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Observed 95% CL for the 1SFH $e$ Dirac model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Expected 95% CL for 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Observed 95% CL for the 1SFH $\mu$ Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Expected 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model on the N mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH NH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Observed 95% CL for 2QDH NH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Expected 95% CL for 2QDH IH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for 2QDH IH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-1$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

+2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

-2$\sigma$ Expected 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Observed 95% CL for the 2QDH IH Majorana model on the $N$ mean proper lifetime $c\tau_N$ vs. $m_N$.

Cutflow for background MC samples all channels

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu\mu$ 0.1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu\mu$ 1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu\mu$ 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu\mu$ 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu\mu$ 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu e$ 0.1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu e$ 1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu e$ 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu e$ 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu e$ 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for uee 0.1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for uee 1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for uee 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for uee 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for uee 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for eee 0.1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for eee 1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for eee 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for eee 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for eee 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $ee\mu$ 0.1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $ee\mu$ 1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $ee\mu$ 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $ee\mu$ 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $ee\mu$ 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $e\mu\mu$ 0.1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $e\mu\mu$ 1 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $e\mu\mu$ 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $e\mu\mu$ 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $e\mu\mu$ 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu\pi$ 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu\pi$ 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu\mu\pi$ 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu e\pi$ 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu e\pi$ 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $\mu e\pi$ 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $e\mu\pi$ 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $e\mu\pi$ 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $e\mu\pi$ 1000 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $ee\pi$ 10 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $ee\pi$ 100 mm signal samples

Raw cutflow for $ee\pi$ 1000 mm signal samples

Cross sections of eee channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of $ee\mu$ channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of $e\mu\mu$ channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu\mu$ channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu e$ channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of uee channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of eee channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of $ee\mu$ channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of $e\mu\mu$ channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu\mu$ channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu e$ channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of uee channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of eee channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of $ee\mu$ channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of $e\mu\mu$ channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu\mu$ channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu e$ channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of uee channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of eee channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of $ee\mu$ channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of $e\mu\mu$ channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu\mu$ channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu e$ channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of uee channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of $ee\pi$ channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of $ee\pi$ channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of $ee\pi$ channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of $ee\pi$ channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of $e\mu\pi$ channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of $e\mu\pi$ channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of $e\mu\pi$ channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of $e\mu\pi$ channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu\pi$ channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu\pi$ channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu\pi$ channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of $\mu\mu\pi$ channels for QD Majorana limit models

Cross sections of $\mu e\pi$ channels for Dirac models

Cross sections of $\mu e\pi$ channels for Majorana models

Cross sections of $\mu e\pi$ channels for QD Dirac limit models

Cross sections of $\mu e\pi$ channels for QD Majorana limit models

Signal efficiencies for leptonic channels

Signal efficiencies for semi-leptonic channels

Distributions of the number of hits in the cluster (Nhits) for the DT category in the signal region (SR). The last histogram bin contains all overflow events.

Distributions of the number of hits in the cluster (Nhits) for the DT category in the out-of-time (OOT) region. The last histogram bin contains all overflow events.

Distributions of the number of hits in the cluster (Nhits) for the CSC category in the signal region (SR). The last histogram bin contains all overflow events.

Distributions of the number of hits in the cluster (Nhits) for the CSC category in the out-of-time (OOT) region. The last histogram bin contains all overflow events.

Distributions of the number of hits in the cluster (Nhits) for the DT category in the out-of-time (OOT) region. The last histogram bin contains all overflow events.

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the VLL production cross section as a function of the VLL mass for the pseudoscalar mean proper decay length c$\tau$ = 0.025 m. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

Distributions of the number of hits in the cluster (Nhits) for the CSC category in the out-of-time (OOT) region. The last histogram bin contains all overflow events.

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the VLL production cross section as a function of the pseudoscalar mean proper decay length c$\tau$ for VLL Mass of 700 GeV. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the VLL production cross section as a function of the VLL mass for the pseudoscalar mean proper decay length c$\tau$ = 0.025 m. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

The 95% CL observed upper limits on the VLL production cross section as a function of the VLL mass and the pseudoscalar mean proper decay length c$\tau$. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

The 95% CL observed and expected upper limits on the VLL production cross section as a function of the pseudoscalar mean proper decay length c$\tau$ for VLL Mass of 700 GeV. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

The 95% CL observed exclusion contour on the VLL production cross section as a function of the VLL mass and the pseudoscalar mean proper decay length c$\tau$. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

The 95% CL observed upper limits on the VLL production cross section as a function of the VLL mass and the pseudoscalar mean proper decay length c$\tau$. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

Selection efficiencies in the CSC category signal region (SR) for different signal hypothesis. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

The 95% CL observed exclusion contour on the VLL production cross section as a function of the VLL mass and the pseudoscalar mean proper decay length c$\tau$. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

Selection efficiencies in the DT category signal region (SR) for different signal hypothesis. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

Selection efficiencies in the CSC category signal region (SR) for different signal hypothesis. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

Selection efficiencies in the DT category signal region (SR) for different signal hypothesis. The pseudoscalar mass is 2 GeV.

The cluster reconstruction efficiency, including both DT and CSC clusters, as a function of the simulated r and |z| decay positions of the pseudoscalar into photons in events with MET > 200 GeV, for a VLL mass of 300 GeV and a pseudoscalar mass of 2 GeV, and a range of ctau values uniformly distributed between 0.01 and 0.1 m.

The cluster reconstruction efficiency, including both DT and CSC clusters, as a function of the simulated r and |z| decay positions of the pseudoscalar into photons in events with MET > 200 GeV, for a VLL mass of 500 GeV and a pseudoscalar mass of 2 GeV, and a range of ctau values uniformly distributed between 0.01 and 0.1 m.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SROS-on-b-$e\mu\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $m_{\text{T}}^{\text{min}}$ in SROS-on-b-$e\mu\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SRSS-$2\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Observed ($N_{\text{obs}}$) and expected ($N_{\text{exp}}$) yields after the background-only fit for the flavor-merged inclusive SRs. The third and fourth columns list the 95\% CL upper limits on the visible cross-section ($\sigma_{\text{vis}}^{95}$) and on the number of signal events ($S_\text{obs}^{95}$). The fifth column ($S_\text{exp}^{95}$) shows the 95\% CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number of background events and its $\pm 1\sigma$ variations. The last two columns indicate the CL$_{\text{b}}$ value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery $p$-value ($p(s = 0)$) with its associated statistical significance $Z$. If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the $p$-value is capped at 0.5.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where only $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100~GeV.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SROS-off-b-$e\mu\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. Ratio values outside the graph range are indicated by brown arrows. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $m_{\text{T}}^{\text{min}}$ in SROS-off-b-$e\mu\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. Ratio values outside the graph range are indicated by brown arrows. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SRSS-$eee$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. Ratio values outside the graph range are indicated by brown arrows. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Distribution of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in SRSS-$ee\mu$. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by a black arrow. The last bin includes the overflow. The `Others' category contains the production of Higgs boson, 3-top, 4-top, and single-top processes. Distributions for SBH signals are overlaid. The bottom panels show the ratio of the observed data to the predicted total background yields. Ratio values outside the graph range are indicated by brown arrows. The hatched band includes all statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ is considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm})$ vs $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 150 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

Observed and expected exclusion limits on the SBH model where mass-degenerate $\tilde{e}_{\text{L}}$, $\tilde{\mu}_{\text{L}}$ and $\tilde{\nu}$ are considered. The expected 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a dashed black line, with the yellow band indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{exp}}$ including all uncertainties except for the signal cross-section uncertainty. The observed 95% CL exclusion limit is shown as a red solid line, with the dotted red lines indicating $\pm1\sigma_{\text{theory}}$ due to the signal cross-section uncertainty. The limits are shown projected onto the $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}^0_3, \tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}, \tilde{\chi}^0_3)$ plane, with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)$ assumed to be 100 GeV.

The expected upper limits on the cross-section for each signal point. The gray numbers represent the values. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid. An asymptotic approximation is employed in the CL$_{\text{s}}$ calculation instead of the full calculation using pseudo-experiments.

The observed upper limits on the cross-section for each signal point. The gray numbers represent the values. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid. An asymptotic approximation is employed in the CL$_{\text{s}}$ calculation instead of the full calculation using pseudo-experiments.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Acceptance for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in flavored-merged SRs. The acceptance is given by the ratio of weighted selected events in the SR to the weighted total number of generated events. The selection is based on generator-level particle information.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Efficiencies for signals with $m(\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=100$ GeV in the $m_{3\ell}$ merged SRSFOS and SRSS. The efficiency is defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level. Efficiencies below 0.002% are rounded to 0. The efficiency values are affected by statistical fluctuations due to the limited number of events.

Summary of the number of events passing each selection for the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}^0_3,\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=(300, 200, 100)$, $(550, 300, 100)$, $(450, 180, 100)$ GeV signal points, including all production processes. After the initial selections, the table is split into row blocks per inclusive region, and then further for each SR channel. Flavor-binned SRs are shown for SROS-on-b for reference. The generator level selections require to have two or more leptons.

Summary of the number of events passing each selection for the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}^0_3,\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=(300, 200, 100)$, $(550, 300, 100)$, $(450, 180, 100)$ GeV signal points, including all production processes. After the initial selections, the table is split into row blocks per inclusive region, and then further for each SR channel. Flavor-binned SRs are shown for SROS-off-b for reference. The generator level selections require to have two or more leptons.

Summary of the number of events passing each selection for the $m(\tilde{\ell}_{\text{L}}^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}^0_3,\tilde{\chi}^0_1)=(300, 200, 100)$, $(550, 300, 100)$, $(450, 180, 100)$ GeV signal points, including all production processes. After the initial selections, the table is split into row blocks per inclusive region, and then further for each SR channel. Flavor-binned SRs are shown. The generator level selections require to have two or more leptons.

Comparison of the shapes extrapolated with a linear or quadratic extrapolation of the QCD contribution in the W+ signal region.

Comparison of the shapes extrapolated with a linear or quadratic extrapolation of the QCD contribution in the W- signal region.

Post-fit distributions of the transverse mass in the W+ signal region.

Post-fit distributions of the transverse mass in the W- signal region.

Post-fit distributions of the dimuon mass in the Z boson signal region.

Example plot for the extrapolation of the QCD contribution from a region with inverted relative isolation criterion to the W+ signal region in the transverse mass bin 12 < mT < 18 GeV. The values corresponding to the smallest relative muon isolation are extrapolated with a linear (smaller value) and quadratic (larger value) function.

Example plot for the extrapolation of the QCD contribution from a region with inverted relative isolation criterion to the W- signal region in the transverse mass bin 12 < mT < 18 GeV.The values corresponding to the smallest relative muon isolation are extrapolated with a linear (smaller value) and quadratic (larger value) function.

Example plot for the extrapolation of the QCD contribution from a region with inverted relative isolation criterion to the W+ signal region in the transverse mass bin 102 < mT < 108 GeV.The values corresponding to the smallest relative muon isolation are extrapolated with a linear (larger value) and quadratic (smaller value) function.

Example plot for the extrapolation of the QCD contribution from a region with inverted relative isolation criterion to the W- signal region in the transverse mass bin 102 < mT < 108 GeV.The values corresponding to the smallest relative muon isolation are extrapolated with a linear (smaller value) and quadratic (larger value) function.

The table compares theoretical and measured values of the product of the fiducial cross sections and branching fractions. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with three different PDF sets. All values are normalized to the corresponding measured value. The relative uncertainties on the measured values are given separately with and without the contribution from the luminosity uncertainty.

The table compares theoretical and measured values of the product of the total cross sections and branching fractions. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with three different PDF sets. All values are normalized to the corresponding measured value. The relative uncertainties on the measured values are given separately with and without the contribution from the luminosity uncertainty.

The table compares theoretical and measured ratios of the product of the fiducial cross sections and branching fractions. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with three different PDF sets. All values are normalized to the corresponding measured value.

The table compares theoretical and measured ratios of the product of the total cross sections and branching fractions. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with three different PDF sets. All values are normalized to the corresponding measured value.

Comparison of the measured and theoretical cross sections for Z, W+, W-, and W production at different center-of-mass energies. The theoretical predictions are generated with DYTurbo in combination with the NNPDF 3.1 PDF set.