Showing 50 of 398 results
Measurements of the suppression and correlations of dijets is performed using 3 $\mu$b$^{-1}$ of Xe+Xe data at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.44$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Dijets with jets reconstructed using the $R=0.4$ anti-$k_t$ algorithm are measured differentially in jet $p_{\text{T}}$ over the range of 32 GeV to 398 GeV and the centrality of the collisions. Significant dijet momentum imbalance is found in the most central Xe+Xe collisions, which decreases in more peripheral collisions. Results from the measurement of per-pair normalized and absolutely normalized dijet $p_{\text{T}}$ balance are compared with previous Pb+Pb measurements at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} =5.02$ TeV. The differences between the dijet suppression in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb are further quantified by the ratio of pair nuclear-modification factors. The results are found to be consistent with those measured in Pb+Pb data when compared in classes of the same event activity and when taking into account the difference between the center-of-mass energies of the initial parton scattering process in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb collisions. These results should provide input for a better understanding of the role of energy density, system size, path length, and fluctuations in the parton energy loss.
The centrality intervals in Xe+Xe collisions and their corresponding TAA with absolute uncertainties.
The centrality intervals in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb collisions for matching SUM ET FCAL intervals and respective TAA values for Xe+Xe collisions.
The performance of the jet energy scale (JES) for jets with $|y| < 2.1$ evaluated as a function of pT_truth in different centrality bins. Simulated hard scatter events were overlaid onto events from a dedicated sample of minimum-bias Xe+Xe data.
The performance of jet energy resolution (JER) for jets with |y| < 2.1 evaluated as a function of pT_truth in different centrality bins. Simulated hard scatter events were overlaid onto events from a dedicated sample of minimum-bias Xe+Xe data. The fit parameters are listed in a sperate table (Extras 1)
The relative magnitude of systematic uncertainties for per-pair normalized xJ distributions in 0-10% Xe+Xe centrality
The relative magnitude of systematic uncertainties for absolutely normalized xJ distributions in 0-10% Xe+Xe centrality
The relative magnitude of systematic uncertainties for rho distributions for leading jets in 0-10% Xe+Xe centrality
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution evaluated in four centrality intervals and given pT1 interval.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution evaluated in four centrality intervals and given pT1 interval.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution evaluated in four centrality intervals and given pT1 interval.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution evaluated in four centrality intervals and given pT1 interval.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution evaluated in four centrality intervals and given pT1 interval.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution evaluated in four centrality intervals and given pT1 interval.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Pb+Pb collisions.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Pb+Pb collisions.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Pb+Pb collisions.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
Absolutely normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions.
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of leading jet pT in the same centrality intervals.
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of leading jet pT in the same centrality intervals.
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of leading jet pT in the same centrality intervals.
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of subleading jet pT in the same centrality intervals.
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of subleading jet pT in the same centrality intervals.
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of subleading jet pT in the same centrality intervals.
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of leading jet pT in the same SUM ETFCal intervals (selecting equivalent event activity)
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of leading jet pT in the same SUM ETFCal intervals (selecting equivalent event activity)
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of leading jet pT in the same SUM ETFCal intervals (selecting equivalent event activity)
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of subleading jet pT in the same SUM ETFCal intervals (selecting equivalent event activity)
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of subleading jet pT in the same SUM ETFCal intervals (selecting equivalent event activity)
The ratios of Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb pair nuclear-modification factors, rho, evaluated as a function of subleading jet pT in the same SUM ETFCal intervals (selecting equivalent event activity)
Parameter a,b, and c from JER fits in Figure 1b.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
Per-pair normalized xJ distribution in Xe+Xe collisions for selected Pb+Pb centrality and pT1 bin.
A search for flavor-changing neutral-current couplings between a top quark, an up or charm quark and a $Z$ boson is presented, using proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV collected by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The analyzed dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The search targets both single-top-quark events produced as $gq\rightarrow tZ$ (with $q = u, c$) and top-quark-pair events, with one top quark decaying through the $t \rightarrow Zq$ channel. The analysis considers events with three leptons (electrons or muons), a $b$-tagged jet, possible additional jets, and missing transverse momentum. The data are found to be consistent with the background-only hypothesis and 95% confidence-level limits on the $t \rightarrow Zq$ branching ratios are set, assuming only tensor operators of the Standard Model effective field theory framework contribute to the $tZq$ vertices. These are $6.2 \times 10^{-5}$ ($13\times 10^{-5}$) for $t\rightarrow Zu$ ($t\rightarrow Zc$) for a left-handed $tZq$ coupling, and $6.6 \times 10^{-5}$ ($12\times 10^{-5}$) in the case of a right-handed coupling. These results are interpreted as 95% CL upper limits on the strength of corresponding couplings, yielding limits for $|C_{uW}^{(13)*}|$ and $|C_{uB}^{(13)*}|$ ($|C_{uW}^{(31)}|$ and $|C_{uB}^{(31)}|$) of 0.15 (0.16), and limits for $|C_{uW}^{(23)*}|$ and $|C_{uB}^{(23)*}|$ ($|C_{uW}^{(32)}|$ and $|C_{uB}^{(32)}|$) of 0.22 (0.21), assuming a new-physics energy scale $\Lambda_\text{NP}$ of 1 TeV.
Summary of the signal strength $\mu$ parameters obtained from the fits to extract LH and RH results for the FCNC tZu and tZc couplings. For the reference branching ratio, the most stringent limits are used.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the FCNC $t\rightarrow Zq$ branching ratios and the effective coupling strengths for different vertices and couplings (top eight rows). For the latter, the energy scale is assumed to be $\Lambda_{NP}$ = 1 TeV. The bottom rows show, for the case of the FCNC $t\rightarrow Zu$ branching ratio, the observed and expected 95% CL limits when only one of the two SRs, either SR1 or SR2, and all CRs are included in the likelihood.
Comparison between data and background prediction before the fit (Pre-Fit) for the mass of the SM top-quark candidate in SR1. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The four FCNC LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to five times the cross-section corresponding to the most stringent observed branching ratio limits. The first (last) bin in all distributions includes the underflow (overflow). The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction before the fit (Pre-Fit) for the mass of the FCNC top-quark candidate in SR1. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The four FCNC LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to five times the cross-section corresponding to the most stringent observed branching ratio limits. The first (last) bin in all distributions includes the underflow (overflow). The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction before the fit (Pre-Fit) for the mass of the SM top-quark candidate in SR2. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The four FCNC LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to five times the cross-section corresponding to the most stringent observed branching ratio limits. The first (last) bin in all distributions includes the underflow (overflow). The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction before the fit (Pre-Fit) for the transverse momentum of the Z boson candidate in SR2. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The four FCNC LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to five times the cross-section corresponding to the most stringent observed branching ratio limits. The first (last) bin in all distributions includes the underflow (overflow). The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZu LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{1}$ discriminant in the mass sideband CR1. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZu LH signals are also separately shown, normalized to 500 times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZu LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{2}^{u}$ discriminant in the mass sideband CR2. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZu LH signals are also separately shown, normalized to 500 times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZu LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{1}$ discriminant in SR1. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZu LH signals are also separately shown, normalized to 50 times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZu LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{2}^{u}$ discriminant in SR2. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZu LH signals are also separately shown, normalized to 50 times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZc LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{1}$ discriminant in the mass sideband CR1. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZc LH signals are also separately shown, normalized to 500 times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZc LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{2}^{c}$ discriminant in the mass sideband CR2. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZc LH signals are also separately shown, normalized to 500 times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZc LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{1}$ discriminant in SR1. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZc LH signals are also separately shown, normalized to 50 times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZc LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{2}^{c}$ discriminant in SR2. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZc LH signals are also separately shown, normalized to 50 times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZu LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the leading lepton $p_{T}$ in the $t\bar{t}$ CR. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZu LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to $10^{3}$ times the best fit of the signal yield. The last bin includes the overflow. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZu LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the third lepton $p_{T}$ in the $t\bar{t}$ CR. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZu LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to $10^{3}$ times the best fit of the signal yield. The last bin includes the overflow. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZu LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the leading lepton $p_{T}$ in the $t\bar{t}Z$ CR. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZu LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to $10^{3}$ times the best fit of the signal yield. The last bin includes the overflow. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Comparison between data and background prediction after the fit to data (Post-Fit) for the FCNC tZu LH coupling extraction. The distribution is for the $D_{1}$ discriminant in the $t\bar{t}Z$ CR. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The FCNC tZu LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to $10^{3}$ times the best fit of the signal yield. The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Several extensions of the Standard Model predict the production of dark matter particles at the LHC. A search for dark matter particles produced in association with a dark Higgs boson decaying into $W^{+}W^{-}$ in the $\ell^\pm\nu q \bar q'$ final states with $\ell=e,\mu$ is presented. This analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The $W^\pm \to q\bar q'$ decays are reconstructed from pairs of calorimeter-measured jets or from track-assisted reclustered jets, a technique aimed at resolving the dense topology from a pair of boosted quarks using jets in the calorimeter and tracking information. The observed data are found to agree with Standard Model predictions. Scenarios with dark Higgs boson masses ranging between 140 and 390 GeV are excluded.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=500 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1000 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1700 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=2100 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding a W<sub>had</sub> candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=500 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.
Probability of finding a W<sub>had</sub> candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1000 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.
Probability of finding a W<sub>had</sub> candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1700 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.
Probability of finding a W<sub>had</sub> candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=2100 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.
Observed exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m<sub>Z'</sub>, m<sub>s</sub>) plane for g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>χ</sub>=1, m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.
Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m<sub>Z'</sub>, m<sub>s</sub>) plane for g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>χ</sub>=1, m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.
Expected+1σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m<sub>Z'</sub>, m<sub>s</sub>) plane for g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>χ</sub>=1, m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.
Expected-1σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m<sub>Z'</sub>, m<sub>s</sub>) plane for g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>χ</sub>=1, m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.
Expected+2σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m<sub>Z'</sub>, m<sub>s</sub>) plane for g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>χ</sub>=1, m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.
Expected-2σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m<sub>Z'</sub>, m<sub>s</sub>) plane for g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>χ</sub>=1, m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.
Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup> W<sup>∓</sup>) for m<sub>Z'</sub>=0.5 TeV as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup> W<sup>∓</sup>) process for m<sub>Z'</sub>=0.5 TeV, shown in dashed blue.
Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup> W<sup>∓</sup>) for m<sub>Z'</sub>=1 TeV as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup> W<sup>∓</sup>) process for m<sub>Z'</sub>=1 TeV, shown in dashed blue.
Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup> W<sup>∓</sup>) for m<sub>Z'</sub>=1.7 TeV as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup> W<sup>∓</sup>) process for m<sub>Z'</sub>=1.7 TeV, shown in dashed blue.
Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup> W<sup>∓</sup>) for m<sub>Z'</sub>=2.1 TeV as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup> W<sup>∓</sup>) process for m<sub>Z'</sub>=2.1 TeV, shown in dashed blue.
Data overlaid on SM background yields stacked in each SR and CR category after the fit to data ('Post-fit'). The yields in the SR are broken down into their contributions to the individual bins. The maximum-likelihood estimators are set to the conditional values of the CR-only fit, and propagated to SR and CRs.
Dominant sources of uncertainty for three dark Higgs scenarios after the fit to data. The uncertainties are quantified in terms of their contribution to the fitted signal uncertainty that is expressed relative to the theory prediction. Three representative dark Higgs signal scenarios with g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>χ</sub>=1.0, sinθ=0.01 and m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV are considered, which are indicated using the (m<sub>Z'</sub>, m<sub>s</sub>) format in units of GeV in the table columns.
Cumulative efficiencies in the merged category for three representative dark Higgs signal scenarios with g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>&chi</sub>;=1.0, sinθ=0.01, m<sub>Z'</sub> = 1 TeV, and m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV considering s→W(ℓν)W(qq) decays only.
Cumulative efficiencies in the resolved category for three representative dark Higgs signal scenarios with g<sub>q</sub>=0.25, g<sub>&chi</sub>;=1.0, sinθ=0.01, m<sub>Z'</sub> = 1 TeV, and m<sub>χ</sub>=200 GeV considering s→W(ℓν)W(qq) decays only.
Theoretical cross section for σ(pp → sχχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup>W<sup>∓</sup>) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m<sub>Z′</sub> ={300, 350, 400, 500, 750} GeV, with g<sub>q</sub> = 0.25, g<sub>χ = 1.0, sinθ = 0.01, m<sub>Z′</sub> = 1 TeV , and m<sub>χ</sub> = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of σ(pp → sχχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup>W<sup>∓</sup>) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (±1σ).
Theoretical cross section for σ(pp → sχχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup>W<sup>∓</sup>) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m<sub>Z′</sub> ={1000, 1700} GeV, with g<sub>q</sub> = 0.25, g<sub>χ = 1.0, sinθ = 0.01, m<sub>Z′</sub> = 1 TeV , and m<sub>χ</sub> = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of σ(pp → sχχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup>W<sup>∓</sup>) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (±1σ).
Theoretical cross section for σ(pp → sχχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup>W<sup>∓</sup>) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m<sub>Z′</sub> ={2100, 2500, 2900, 3300} GeV, with g<sub>q</sub> = 0.25, g<sub>χ = 1.0, sinθ = 0.01, m<sub>Z′</sub> = 1 TeV , and m<sub>χ</sub> = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of σ(pp → sχχ) × B(s → W<sup>±</sup>W<sup>∓</sup>) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (±1σ).
Inclusive and differential measurements of the top-antitop ($t\bar{t}$) charge asymmetry $A_\text{C}^{t\bar{t}}$ and the leptonic asymmetry $A_\text{C}^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ are presented in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV recorded by the ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The measurement uses the complete Run 2 dataset, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, combines data in the single-lepton and dilepton channels, and employs reconstruction techniques adapted to both the resolved and boosted topologies. A Bayesian unfolding procedure is performed to correct for detector resolution and acceptance effects. The combined inclusive $t\bar{t}$ charge asymmetry is measured to be $A_\text{C}^{t\bar{t}} = 0.0068 \pm 0.0015$, which differs from zero by 4.7 standard deviations. Differential measurements are performed as a function of the invariant mass, transverse momentum and longitudinal boost of the $t\bar{t}$ system. Both the inclusive and differential measurements are found to be compatible with the Standard Model predictions, at next-to-next-to-leading order in quantum chromodynamics perturbation theory with next-to-leading-order electroweak corrections. The measurements are interpreted in the framework of the Standard Model effective field theory, placing competitive bounds on several Wilson coefficients.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Results:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul> <b>Bounds on the Wilson coefficients:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=BoundsonWilsoncoefficientschargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=BoundsonWilsoncoefficientschargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> </ul> <b>Ranking of systematic uncertainties:</b></br> Inclusive:<a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a></br> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin0">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0,0.3]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin1">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.3,0.6]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin2">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.6,0.8]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin3">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.8,1]$</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin0">$m_{t\bar{t}}$ < $500$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin1">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [500,750]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin2">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [750,1000]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin3">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [1000,1500]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin4">$m_{t\bar{t}}$ > $1500$GeV</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin0">$p_{T,t\bar{t}} \in [0,30]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin1">$p_{T,t\bar{t}} \in[30,120]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin2">$p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ > $120$GeV</a> </ul> Inclusive leptonic:<a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a></br> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin0">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0,0.3]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin1">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.3,0.6]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin2">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.6,0.8]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin3">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.8,1]$</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin0">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < $200$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin1">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [200,300]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin2">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [300,400]$Ge$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin3">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > $400$GeV</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin0">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}\in [0,20]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin1">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}\in[20,70]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin2">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > $70$GeV</a> </ul> <b>NP correlations:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationsleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul> <b>Covariance matrices:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul>
The unfolded inclusive charge asymmetry. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed, and the impact of the linear term of the Wilson coefficient on the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ prediction is shown for two different values. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the invariant mass of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed, and the impact of the linear term of the Wilson coefficient on the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ prediction is shown for two different values. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the transverse momentum of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the longitudinal boost of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The unfolded inclusive leptonic asymmetry. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.
The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the invariant mass of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.
The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the transverse momentum of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.
The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the longitudinal boost of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.
Individual 68% and 95% CL bounds on the relevant Wilson coefficients of the SM Effective Field Theory in units of $\text{TeV}^{-2}$. The bounds are derived from the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. The experimental uncertainties are accounted for, in the form of the complete covariance matrix that keeps track of correlations between bins for the differential measurement. The theory uncertainty from the NNLO QCD + NLO EW calculation is included by explicitly varying the renormalization and factorization scales, or the parton density functions, in the calculation and registering the variations in the intervals.
Individual 68% and 95% CL bounds on the relevant Wilson coefficients of the SM Effective Field Theory in units of $\text{TeV}^{-2}$. The bounds are derived from the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement. The experimental uncertainties are accounted for, in the form of the complete covariance matrix that keeps track of correlations between bins for the differential measurement. The theory uncertainty from the NNLO QCD + NLO EW calculation is included by explicitly varying the renormalization and factorization scales, or the parton density functions, in the calculation and registering the variations in the intervals.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0,0.3]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.3,0.6]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.6,0.8]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.8,1]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ < 500 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [500,750] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [750,1000] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [1000,1500] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ > 1500 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ < 30 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [30,120] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ > 120 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ inclusive measurement. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0,0.3]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.3,0.6]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.6,0.8]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.8,1]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < 200 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [200,300] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [300,400] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > 400 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < 20 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [20, 70] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > 70 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.
Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.
Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.
Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.
Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.
Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ inclusive measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.
Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.
Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.
Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.
Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement.
Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement.
Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement.
Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement.
Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement.
Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement.
A combination of measurements of the inclusive top-quark pair production cross-section performed by ATLAS and CMS in proton-proton collisions at centre-of-mass energies of 7 and 8 TeV at the LHC is presented. The cross-sections are obtained using top-quark pair decays with an opposite-charge electron-muon pair in the final state and with data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of about 5 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV and about 20 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV for each experiment. The combined cross-sections are determined to be $178.5 \pm 4.7$ pb at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV and $243.3^{+6.0}_{-5.9}$ pb at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV with a correlation of 0.41, using a reference top-quark mass value of 172.5 GeV. The ratio of the combined cross-sections is determined to be $R_{8/7}= 1.363\pm 0.032$. The combined measured cross-sections and their ratio agree well with theory calculations using several parton distribution function (PDF) sets. The values of the top-quark pole mass (with the strong coupling fixed at 0.118) and the strong coupling (with the top-quark pole mass fixed at 172.5 GeV) are extracted from the combined results by fitting a next-to-next-to-leading-order plus next-to-next-to-leading-log QCD prediction to the measurements. Using a version of the NNPDF3.1 PDF set containing no top-quark measurements, the results obtained are $m_t^\text{pole} = 173.4^{+1.8}_{-2.0}$ GeV and $\alpha_\text{s}(m_Z)= 0.1170^{+ 0.0021}_{-0.0018}$.
Full covariance matrix including all systematic uncertainties expressed as nuisance parameters. With the exception of the cross section parameters, all parameters were normalised to 1 before the fit. Therefore, the diagonal elements represent the constraint in quadrature.
Full covariance matrix including all systematic uncertainties expressed as nuisance parameters. With the exception of the cross section parameters, all parameters were normalised to 1 before the fit. Therefore, the diagonal elements represent the constraint in quadrature.
A search for the electroweak production of charginos, neutralinos and sleptons decaying into final states involving two or three electrons or muons is presented. The analysis is based on 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV proton--proton collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Several scenarios based on simplified models are considered. These include the associated production of the next-to-lightest neutralino and the lightest chargino, followed by their decays into final states with leptons and the lightest neutralino via either sleptons or Standard Model gauge bosons; direct production of chargino pairs, which in turn decay into leptons and the lightest neutralino via intermediate sleptons; and slepton pair production, where each slepton decays directly into the lightest neutralino and a lepton. No significant deviations from the Standard Model expectation are observed and stringent limits at 95% confidence level are placed on the masses of relevant supersymmetric particles in each of these scenarios. For a massless lightest neutralino, masses up to 580 GeV are excluded for the associated production of the next-to-lightest neutralino and the lightest chargino, assuming gauge-boson mediated decays, whereas for slepton-pair production masses up to 500 GeV are excluded assuming three generations of mass-degenerate sleptons.
The mll distribution for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 2l+0jets channel for SR2-SF-loose. Two signal points are added for comparison.
The mT2 distribution for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 2l+0jets channel for SR2-SF-loose. Two signal points are added for comparison.
The mT2 distributions for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 2l+0jets channel for the SR2-DF-100 selection. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of ETmiss for data and the expected SM backgrounds in the 2l+jets channel for SR2-int/high, without the final ETmiss requirement applied. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of ETmiss for data and the expected SM backgrounds in the 2l+jets channel for SR2-low, without the final ETmiss requirement applied. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of ETmiss for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 3l channel for SR3-slep-a. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of ETmiss for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 3l channel for SR3-slep-b. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of the third leading lepton pT in SR3-slep-c,d,e. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of ETmiss for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 3l channel for SR3-WZ-0Ja,b,c. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of ETmiss for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 3l channel for SR3-WZ-1Ja. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of ETmiss for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 3l channel for SR3-WZ-1Jb. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Distributions of ETmiss for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the 3l channel for SR3-WZ-1Jc. Two signal points are added for comparison.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-pair production.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-pair production.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for direct slepton production.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for direct slepton production.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with slepton-mediated decays.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with slepton-mediated decays.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with W/Z-mediated decays.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with W/Z-mediated decays.
The mT2 distributions for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the exclusive SF signal regions of the 2l+0jets channel in the regions 111 < mll < 150 GeV (corresponding to SR2-SF-a,b,c,d). Two signal points are added for comparison.
The mT2 distributions for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the exclusive SF signal regions of the 2l+0jets channel in the regions 150 < mll < 200 GeV (corresponding to SR2-SF-e,f,g,h). Two signal points are added for comparison.
The mT2 distributions for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the exclusive SF signal regions of the 2l+0jets channel in the regions 200 < mll < 300 GeV (corresponding to SR2-SF-i,j,k,l). Two signal points are added for comparison.
The mT2 distributions for data and the estimated SM backgrounds in the exclusive SF signal regions of the 2l+0jets channel in the regions mll > 300 GeV (corresponding to SR2-SF-m). Two signal points are added for comparison.
Signal acceptance for C1C1 production in SR2-SFloose for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$ .
Signal efficiency for C1C1 production in SR2-SFloose for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for C1C1 production in SR2-SFtight for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for C1C1 production in SR2-SFtight for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for C1C1 production in SR2-DF100 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for C1C1 production in SR2-DF100 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for C1C1 production in SR2-DF150 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for C1C1 production in SR2-DF150 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for C1C1 production in SR2-DF200 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for C1C1 production in SR2-DF200 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for C1C1 production in SR2-DF300 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for C1C1 production in SR2-DF300 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for direct Slepton production in SR2-SF-Loose for the process P P -> $\tilde{\ell}^\pm \tilde{\ell}^\mp$ -> $\ell^\pm \ell^\mp \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for direct Slepton production in SR2-SF-Loose for the process P P -> $\tilde{\ell}^\pm \tilde{\ell}^\mp$ -> $\ell^\pm \ell^\mp \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for direct Slepton production in SR2-SF-Tight for the process P P -> $\tilde{\ell}^\pm \tilde{\ell}^\mp$ -> $\ell^\pm \ell^\mp \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for direct Slepton production in SR2-SF-Tight for the process P P -> $\tilde{\ell}^\pm \tilde{\ell}^\mp$ -> $\ell^\pm \ell^\mp \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for C1N2 production in SR2-low for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->2j) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for C1N2 production in SR2-low for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->2j) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for C1N2 production in SR2-int for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->2j) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for C1N2 production in SR2-int for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->2j) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for C1N2 production in SR2-high for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->2j) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for C1N2 production in SR2-high for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->2j) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for Slep production in SR3-slepa for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for Slep production in SR3-slepa for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for Slep production in SR3-slepb for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for Slep production in SR3-slepb for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for Slep production in SR3-slepc for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for Slep production in SR3-slepc for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for Slep production in SR3-slepd for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for Slep production in SR3-slepd for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for Slep production in SR3-slepe for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for Slep production in SR3-slepe for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for WZ production in SR3-WZ-0Ja for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for WZ production in SR3-WZ-0Ja for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for WZ production in SR3-WZ-0Jb for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for WZ production in SR3-WZ-0Jb for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for WZ production in SR3-WZ-0Jc for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for WZ production in SR3-WZ-0Jc for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for WZ production in SR3-WZ-1Ja for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for WZ production in SR3-WZ-1Ja for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for WZ production in SR3-WZ-1Jb for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for WZ production in SR3-WZ-1Jb for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal acceptance for WZ production in SR3-WZ-1Jc for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal efficiency for WZ production in SR3-WZ-1Jc for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Signal regions contributing to the observed exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with W/Z-mediated decays.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with W/Z-mediated decays in the 2l+jets channel.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with W/Z-mediated decays in the 2l+jets channel.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with W/Z-mediated decays in the 3l channel.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for chargino-neutralino production with W/Z-mediated decays in the 2l+jets channel.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for left-handed slepton production.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for left-handed slepton production.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for right-handed slepton production.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for right-handed slepton production.
95% upper limit on production cross-section for chargino-pair production.
95% upper limit on production cross-section for direct slepton production.
95% upper limit on production cross-section for chargino-neutralino production with slepton-mediated decays.
95% upper limit on production cross-section for chargino-neutralino production with W/Z-mediated decays
<b>Cutflow 1</b> Event counts for a signal point in SR2-SF-loose for the process P P -> $\tilde{\ell}^\pm \tilde{\ell}^\mp$ -> $\ell^\pm \ell^\mp \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
<b>Cutflow 2</b> Event counts for a signal point in SR2-SF-loose and SR2-DF-100 for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
<b>Cutflow 3</b> Event counts for two signal points in SR2-int for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
<b>Cutflow 4</b> Event counts for two signal points in SR2-low for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_1^\mp$ -> 2x $\ell \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
<b>Cutflow 5</b> Event counts for two signal points in SR3-WZ-0Ja/b/c and SR3-WZ-1Ja/b/c for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $W$(->l $\nu$) $Z$(->2l) $\widetilde{\chi}_1^0 \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
<b>Cutflow 6</b> Event counts for two signal points in SR3-slepa-e for the process P P -> $\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm \widetilde{\chi}_2^0$ -> $\tilde{\ell}_L \tilde{\ell}_L l (\tilde{\nu}\nu), l \tilde{\nu} \tilde{\ell}_L (\tilde{\nu}\nu)$ -> $l \nu \widetilde{\chi}_1^0 l l (\nu \nu) \widetilde{\chi}_1^0$.
Properties of the Higgs boson are measured in the two-photon final state using 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data recorded at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. Cross-section measurements for the production of a Higgs boson through gluon-gluon fusion, vector-boson fusion, and in association with a vector bosonor a top-quark pair are reported. The signal strength, defined as the ratio of the observed to the expected signal yield, is measured for each of these production processes as well as inclusively. The global signal strength measurement of $0.99 \pm 0.14$ improves on the precision of the ATLAS measurement at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ and 8 TeV by a factor of two. Measurements of gluon-gluon fusion and vector-boson fusion productions yield signal strengths compatible with the Standard Model prediction. Measurements of simplified template cross sections, designed to quantify the different Higgs boson production processes in specific regions of phase space, are reported. The cross section for the production of the Higgs boson decaying to two isolated photons in a fiducial region closely matching the experimental selection of the photons is measured to be $55 \pm 10$ fb, which is in good agreement with the Standard Model prediction of $64 \pm 2$ fb. Furthermore, cross sections in fiducial regions enriched in Higgs boson production in vector-boson fusion or in association with large missing transverse momentum, leptons or top-quark pairs are reported. Differential and double-differential measurements are performed for several variables related to the diphoton kinematics as well as the kinematics and multiplicity of the jets produced in association with a Higgs boson. No significant deviations from a wide array of Standard Model predictions are observed.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PT(2GAMMA). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of YRAP(2GAMMA). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PTTHRUST(2GAMMA). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of COS(THETA*). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of DELTAYRAP(2GAMMA). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of MULT(JET,PT>30 GEV). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of MULT(JET,PT>50 GEV). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PT(JET1). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PT(JET2). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of HT. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of YRAP(JET1). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of YRAP(JET2). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of M(2JET). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of DELTAYRAP(2JET). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of ABSDPHI(2JET). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of DPHI(2JET). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PT(2GAMMA2JET). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of DPHI(2GAMMA,2JET). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of TAUJET. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of SUM(TAUJET). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PT(2GAMMA) [NJET=0,PT>30 GEV]. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PT(2GAMMA) [NJET=1,PT>30 GEV]. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PT(2GAMMA) [NJET=2,PT>30 GEV]. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of PT(2GAMMA) [NJET>=3,PT>30 GEV]. Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.
The measured cross sections or cross section limits of the diphoton, VBF-enhanced, Nlepton $\geq$ 1, high $E_{T}^{miss}$, and ttH-enhanced fiducial regions are shown.
Measured differential cross section with associated uncertainties as a function of diphoton transverse momentum in bins of ABS(COS(THETA*)). Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources and fully correlated across bins, except for the background modelling systematics for which an uncorrelated treatment across bins is more appropriate.Each systematic uncertainty sources is fully uncorrelated with the other sources.
Non-perturbative correction factors in percent accounting for the impact of hadronisation and the underlying event activity for all measured variables and fiducial regions. Regions of phase space where no reliable estimate could be obtained are listed as 100 without uncertainties. Uncertainties are evaluated by deriving these factors using different generators and tunes as described in the text. No factor are given for the Nlepton $\geq$ 1 and High-$E_{T}^{miss}$ fiducial regions as the gluon fusion contamination in both is negligible.
Isolation efficiencies in percent for gluon fusion $H\rightarrow\gamma\gamma$ for each fiducial region/variable bin measured in this analysis. The isolation efficiency is defined as the probability for both photons to fulfil the isolation criteria (as described in Section 9.1) for events that pass the diphoton kinematic criteria. Regions of phase space where no reliable estimate could be obtained are listed as 100 without uncertainties. Uncertainties are assigned in the same way as for the non-perturbative correction factors: by varying the fragmentation and underlying event modelling. These factors can be multiplied by the kinematic acceptance factors (see Table 29) to extrapolate an inclusive gluon fusion Higgs prediction to the fiducial volume used in this analysis. No factors for the Nlepton $\geq$ 1 and High $E_{T}^{miss}$ fiducial regions are provided as the gluon fusion contamination is negligible.
Combined non-perturbative (Table 27) and particle-level isolation correction factors (Table 28) in percent accounting for the impact of hadronisation and the underlying event activity for all measured variables and fiducial regions. Regions of phase space where no reliable estimate could be obtained are listed as 100 without uncertainties. The uncertainties on the combined values properly take into account the correlations between both multiplicative factors.
Diphoton kinematic acceptances in percent for gluon-gluon fusion for the diphoton fiducial region and all differential variable bins studied in this paper, defined as the probability to fulfill the diphoton kinematic criteria: $p_{T}$/$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 0.35 (0.25) for the leading (subleading) photon and $|\eta_{\gamma\gamma}|$ < 2.37. The factors are evaluated using the Powheg NNLOPSevent generator. Uncertainties are taken from PDF variations. QCD scale variations have a negligible impact on these factors. The range of each bin is given in Table 26.
observed statistical correlations between pTyy, Njets, mjj, |DeltaPhijj| and pTj1
ggH default MC + XH predictions
XH ( = VBF + VH + ttH + bbH ) MC predictions
Best-fit values and uncertainties of the production-mode cross sections times branching ratio.
Best-fit values and uncertainties of the simplified template cross sections times branching ratio.
Observed correlations between the measured simplified template cross sections, including both the statistical and systematic uncertainties.
Best-fit values and uncertainties of the simplified template cross sections times branching ratio.
Observed correlations between the measured simplified template cross sections, including both the statistical and systematic uncertainties.
Observed correlations between the measured simplified template cross sections, including both the statistical and systematic uncertainties.
A search is presented for photonic signatures, motivated by generalized models of gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking. This search makes use of proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ recorded by the ATLAS detector at the LHC, and it explores models dominated by both strong and electroweak production of supersymmetric partner states. Experimental signatures incorporating an isolated photon and significant missing transverse momentum are explored. These signatures include events with an additional photon or additional jet activity not associated with any specific underlying quark flavor. No significant excess of events is observed above the Standard Model prediction, and 95% confidence-level upper limits of between 0.083 fb and 0.32 fb are set on the visible cross section of contributions from physics beyond the Standard Model. These results are interpreted in terms of lower limits on the masses of gluinos, squarks, and gauginos in the context of generalized models of gauge-mediated supersymmetry, which reach as high as 2.3 TeV for strongly produced and 1.3 TeV for weakly produced supersymmetric partner pairs.
Distribution of the total visible transverse energy $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ for selected diphoton events, after requiring $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{min}} (\mathrm{jet}, E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}) > 0.5$ but before application of a requirement on $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ and $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{min}} (\gamma, E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}})$ ($\gamma\gamma$ pre-selection). Also shown are the expected $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions of contributing SM processes as well as those for two points each in the parameter spaces of the gluino-bino and wino-bino GGM models (mass values in GeV). Events outside the range of the displayed region are included in the highest-value bin.
Distribution of $R_{\mathrm{T}}^{4}$ for the sample satisfying all $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ selection criteria except the $R_{\mathrm{T}}^{4}$ requirement itself, but with a relaxed requirement of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 100$ GeV. Also shown are the expected $R_{\mathrm{T}}^{4}$ distributions of contributing SM processes as well as those for two points in the $m_{\tilde{g}}$-$m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ parameter space of the GGM model relevant to the photon+jets analysis (mass values in GeV). The value of the gluino mass arises from the choice $M_3 = 1900$ GeV, while the values of the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ mass arise from the choices $\mu = 400$ and $\mu = 600$ GeV, combined with the constraint that the branching fraction of $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \to \gamma\tilde{G}$ be 50%. The vertical dashed line and left-pointing arrow shows the region of the $R_{\mathrm{T}}^{4}$ observable selected for inclusion in $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$. Uncertainties are shown as hatched bands for the various expected sources of SM background (statistical only) and as error bars for data. The lower panels show the ratio of the data to the SM prediction.
Comparisons between expected and observed content of the validation and signal regions for the diphoton analysis. The uncertainties in the numbers of expected events are the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties. The lower panel shows the pull (difference between observed and expected event counts normalized by the uncertainty) for each region.
Distribution of the missing transverse momentum $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ for the sample satisfying all requirements of the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ selection except the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ requirement itself. Overlaid are the expected SM backgrounds, separated into the various contributing sources. Also shown are the signal expectations for the ($m_{\tilde{W}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$) = (1000,100) GeV and ($m_{\tilde{W}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$) = (1000,800) GeV models. The vertical dashed lines and right-pointing arrows show the region of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ observable selected for inclusion in $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ and $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$. The lower panels show the ratio of observed data to the combined SM expectation. For these plots, the band represents the range of combined statistical and systematic uncertainty in the SM expectation. Events outside the range of the displayed region are included in the highest-value bin.
Distribution of the missing transverse momentum $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ for the sample satisfying all requirements of the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ selection except the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ requirement itself. Overlaid are the expected SM backgrounds, separated into the various contributing sources. Also shown are the signal expectations for the ($m_{\tilde{W}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$) = (1000,100) GeV and ($m_{\tilde{W}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$) = (1000,800) GeV models. The vertical dashed lines and right-pointing arrows show the region of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ observable selected for inclusion in $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ and $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$. The lower panels show the ratio of observed data to the combined SM expectation. For these plots, the band represents the range of combined statistical and systematic uncertainty in the SM expectation. Events outside the range of the displayed region are included in the highest-value bin.
Comparisons between expected and observed content of the validation and signal regions for the photon+jets analysis. The uncertainties in the expected numbers of events are the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties. The lower panel shows the pull (difference between observed and expected event counts normalized by the uncertainty) for each region.
Distribution of the missing transverse momentum $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ for the sample satisfying all requirements of the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ selection except the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ requirement itself. Overlaid are the expected SM backgrounds, separated into the various contributing sources. Also shown are the signal expectations for points in the $m_{\tilde{g}}-m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ parameter space of the GGM model relevant to the photon+jets analysis (mass values in GeV). The value of the gluino mass arises from the choice $M_{3}$ = 1900 GeV. The $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ mass values of 1868, 1920, 442 and 652 GeV arise from the choices $\mu$ = 1810, 1868, 400 and 600 GeV, respectively, combined with the constraint that the branching fraction of $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ $\to \gamma \tilde{G}$ be 50%. The vertical dashed lines and right-pointing arrows show the region of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ observable selected for inclusion in $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ and $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L200}$, the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ requirement is 200 GeV rather than 300 GeV. The lower panels show the ratio of observed data to the combined SM expectation. For these plots, the band represents the range of statistical uncertainty in the SM expectation. Events outside the range of the displayed region are included in the highest-value bin.
Distribution of the missing transverse momentum $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ for the sample satisfying all requirements of the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L200}$ selection except the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ requirement itself. Overlaid are the expected SM backgrounds, separated into the various contributing sources. Also shown are the signal expectations for points in the $m_{\tilde{g}}-m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ parameter space of the GGM model relevant to the photon+jets analysis (mass values in GeV). The value of the gluino mass arises from the choice $M_{3}$ = 1900 GeV. The $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ mass values of 1868, 1920, 442 and 652 GeV arise from the choices $\mu$ = 1810, 1868, 400 and 600 GeV, respectively, combined with the constraint that the branching fraction of $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \to \gamma \tilde{G}$ be 50%. The vertical dashed lines and right-pointing arrows show the region of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ observable selected for inclusion in $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ and $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L200}$, the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ requirement is 200 GeV rather than 300 GeV. The lower panels show the ratio of observed data to the combined SM expectation. For these plots, the band represents the range of statistical uncertainty in the SM expectation. Events outside the range of the displayed region are included in the highest-value bin.
Expected exclusion limits in the gluino-bino mass plane, using the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} > 1600$ GeV and the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} < 1600$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limits in the gluino--bino mass plane, using the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} > 1600$ GeV and the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} < 1600$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limit in the squark-bino mass plane, using the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} > 900$ GeV and the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} < 900$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limit in the squark--bino mass plane, using the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} > 900$ GeV and the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} < 900$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limit in the wino-bino mass plane, using the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} > 400$ GeV and the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ < 400$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limit in the wino-bino mass plane, using the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}} > 400$ GeV and the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ analysis for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ < 400$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limits for the $\mu > 0$ higgsino-bino GGM model explored by the photon+jets analysis.
Observed exclusion limits for the $\mu > 0$ higgsino-bino GGM model explored by the photon+jets analysis.
Distribution of the transverse momentum $p_{\mathrm{T}} (\ell\gamma\gamma)$ of events in the $\ell\gamma\gamma$ control region (except without a cut on $p_{\mathrm{T}} (\ell\gamma\gamma)$). Also shown is the expected contribution from various SM sources, including $W(\to\ell\nu) + \gamma\gamma$ production itself. The displayed uncertainties are a combination of those from all SM sources except $W(\to\ell\nu) + \gamma\gamma$ production, and include statistical and systematic uncertainties.
Distribution of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ for diphoton events in a validation region defined by a requirement of $H_{\mathrm{T}} > 1750$ GeV. Also shown is the expected contribution from various SM sources, as well as their combined statistical and systematic uncertainties.
Distribution of $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ for diphoton events in a validation region defined by requirement of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 100$ GeV. Also shown is the expected contribution from various SM sources, as well as their combined statistical and systematic uncertainties.
Distribution of $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ for events satisfying all requirements $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ save the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement itself. Also shown is the expected contribution from various SM sources, and their combined statistical uncertainties.
Distribution of $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ for events satisfying all requirements $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ save the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement itself. Also shown is the expected contribution from various SM sources, and their combined statistical uncertainties.
Derived exclusion limits for the gluino-bino GGM model explored by the diphoton analysis. For each point in the gluino-bino parameter space, the SR ($\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$) that provides the best expected sensitivity is used to estimate the exclusion likelihood. The model dependent upper limits on cross-section (fb) are shown by grey numbers for each signal point.
Derived exclusion limits for the squark-bino GGM model explored by the diphoton analysis. For each point in the squark-bino parameter space, the SR ($\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$) that provides the best expected sensitivity is used to estimate the exclusion likelihood. The model dependent upper limits on cross-section (fb) are shown by grey numbers for each signal point.
Derived exclusion limits for the wino-bino GGM model explored by the diphoton analysis. For each point in the wino-bino parameter space, the SR ($\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$) that provides the best expected sensitivity is used to estimate the exclusion likelihood. The model dependent upper limits on cross-section (fb) are shown by grey numbers for each signal point.
Derived exclusion limits for the $\mu > 0$ higgsino-bino GGM model explored by the photon+jets analysis. For each point in the higgsino-bino parameter space, the SR ($\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$) that provides the best expected sensitivity is used to estimate the exclusion likelihood. The model dependent upper limits on cross-section (fb) are shown by grey numbers for each signal point.
Derived exclusion limits for the gluino-bino GGM model explored by the diphoton analysis. For each point in the gluino-bino parameter space, the SR ($\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$) that provides the best expected sensitivity is used to estimate the exclusion likelihood. The labels indicate the best-expected signal region for each point, where SL and SH mean $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ and $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$, respectively.
Derived exclusion limits for the squark-bino GGM model explored by the diphoton analysis. For each point in the squark-bino parameter space, the SR ($\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$) that provides the best expected sensitivity is used to estimate the exclusion likelihood. The labels indicate the best-expected signal region for each point, where SL and SH mean $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ and $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$, respectively.
Derived exclusion limits for the wino--bino GGM model explored by the diphoton analysis. For each point in the wino-bino parameter space, the SR ($\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$) that provides the best expected sensitivity is used to estimate the exclusion likelihood. The labels indicate the best-expected signal region for each point, where WL and WH mean $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ and $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$, respectively.
Derived exclusion limits for the $\mu > 0$ higgsino-bino GGM model explored by the photon+jets analysis. For each point in the higgsino-bino parameter space, the SR ($\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ or $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$) that provides the best expected sensitivity is used to estimate the exclusion likelihood. The labels indicate the best-expected signal region for each point, where L and H mean $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ and $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$, respectively.
Acceptance and efficiency for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ for the signal models of the gluino-bino GGM grid.
Acceptance and efficiency for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ for the signal models of the gluino-bino GGM grid.
Acceptance and efficiency for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ for the signal models of the squark-bino GGM grid.
Acceptance and efficiency for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ for the signal models of the squark-bino GGM grid.
Acceptance and efficiency for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ for the signal models of the wino-bino GGM grid.
Acceptance and efficiency for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ for the signal models of the wino-bino GGM grid.
Acceptance and efficiency for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ for the signal models of the photon+jets GGM grid.
Acceptance and efficiency for $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ for the signal models of the photon+jets GGM grid.
Cutflow for the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ selection for one relevant signal point in the gluino-bino model, where the gluinos have mass of 1900 GeV and the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ has a mass of 300 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ selection for one relevant signal point in the gluino-bino model, where the gluinos have mass of 1900 GeV and the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ has a mass of 1700 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ selection for one relevant signal point in the squark-bino model, where the squarks have mass of 1700 GeV and the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ has a mass of 200 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ selection for one relevant signal point in the squark-bino model, where the squarks have mass of 1700 GeV and the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ has a mass of 1600 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ selection for one relevant signal point in the wino-bino model, where the winos have mass of 1000 GeV and the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ has a mass of 200 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ selection for one relevant signal point in the wino-bino model, where the winos have mass of 1000 GeV and the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ has a mass of 800 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ selection, for two relevant signal points in the higgsino-bino model, where the gluinos have mass of 1974 GeV and the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ has a mass of 442 GeV (10000 generated events), and 652 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the $\mathrm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ selection, for two relevant signal points in the higgsino-bino model, where the gluinos have mass of 1974 GeV and the $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ has a mass of 1868 GeV (10000 generated events), and 1920 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
A search for $W'$-boson production in the $W' \rightarrow t\bar{b} \rightarrow q\bar{q}' b\bar{b}$ decay channel is presented using 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider in 2015 and 2016. The search is interpreted in terms of both a left-handed and a right-handed chiral $W'$ boson within the mass range 1-5 TeV. Identification of the hadronically decaying top quark is performed using jet substructure tagging techniques based on a shower deconstruction algorithm. No significant deviation from the Standard Model prediction is observed and the results are expressed as upper limits on the $W' \rightarrow t\bar{b}$ production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of the $W'$-boson mass. These limits exclude $W'$ bosons with right-handed couplings with masses below 3.0 TeV and $W'$ bosons with left-handed couplings with masses below 2.9 TeV, at the 95% confidence level.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the right-handed W'-boson cross-section times branching ratio of W' to tb decay as a function of the corresponding W'-boson mass.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the left-handed W'-boson cross-section times branching ratio of W' to tb decay as a function of the corresponding W'-boson mass.
Reconstructed mtb distribution in data and for the background after the fit to the data in the signal region SR1. The statistical uncertainty on data points is calculated using assymetric Poisson confidence intervals.
Reconstructed mtb distribution in data and for the background after the fit to the data in the signal region SR2. The statistical uncertainty on data points is calculated using assymetric Poisson confidence intervals.
Reconstructed mtb distribution in data and for the background after the fit to the data in the signal region SR3. The statistical uncertainty on data points is calculated using assymetric Poisson confidence intervals.
Reconstructed mtb distribution in data and for the background after the fit to the data in the validation region VR. The statistical uncertainty on data points is calculated using assymetric Poisson confidence intervals.
A search for high-mass resonances decaying to $\tau\nu$ using proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV produced by the Large Hadron Collider is presented. Only $\tau$-lepton decays with hadrons in the final state are considered. The data were recorded with the ATLAS detector and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$. No statistically significant excess above the Standard Model expectation is observed; model-independent upper limits are set on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section. Heavy $W^{\prime}$ bosons with masses less than 3.7 TeV in the Sequential Standard Model and masses less than 2.2-3.8 TeV depending on the coupling in the non-universal G(221) model are excluded at the 95% credibility level.
Observed and predicted $m_{\rm T}$ distributions including SSM and NU (cot$\phi$ = 5.5) $W^{\prime}$ signals with masses of 3 TeV. Please note that in the paper figure the bin content is divided by the bin width, but this is not done in the HepData table.
Observed and predicted $m_{\rm T}$ distributions including SSM and NU (cot$\phi$ = 5.5) $W^{\prime}$ signals with masses of 3 TeV. Please note that in the paper figure the bin content is divided by the bin width, but this is not done in the HepData table.
Observed and predicted $m_{\rm T}$ distributions including SSM and NU (cot$\phi$ = 5.5) $W^{\prime}$ signals with masses of 3 TeV. Please note that in the paper figure the bin content is divided by the bin width, but this is not done in the HepData table. The table also contains each background contribution to the Standard Model expectation separately with their statistical uncertainties.
Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.
Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.
Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.
Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.
Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.
Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.
Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.
Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.
Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.
Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.
Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.
Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.
Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.
Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.
Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.
Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.
Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.
Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.
Measurements are made of differential cross-sections of highly boosted pair-produced top quarks as a function of top-quark and $t\bar{t}$ system kinematic observables using proton--proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. The data set corresponds to an integrated luminosity of $36.1$ fb$^{-1}$, recorded in 2015 and 2016 with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. Events with two large-radius jets in the final state, one with transverse momentum $p_{\rm T} > 500$ GeV and a second with $p_{\rm T}>350$ GeV, are used for the measurement. The top-quark candidates are separated from the multijet background using jet substructure information and association with a $b$-tagged jet. The measured spectra are corrected for detector effects to a particle-level fiducial phase space and a parton-level limited phase space, and are compared to several Monte Carlo simulations by means of calculated $\chi^2$ values. The cross-section for $t\bar{t}$ production in the fiducial phase-space region is $292 \pm 7 \ \rm{(stat)} \pm 76 \rm{(syst)}$ fb, to be compared to the theoretical prediction of $384 \pm 36$ fb.
inclusive absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,1}$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,1}|$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,2}$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,1}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,1}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,1}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,1}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,1}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,1}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,1}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,1}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,2}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,2}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,2}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t,2}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level
$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level
Statistical correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section of all 13 variables at particle level. The observables are arranged as follows: leading top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ [bins 1-8], leading top rapidity - $|y^{t,1}|$ [bins 9-14], subleading top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ [bins 15-21], subleading top rapidity - $|y^{t,2}|$ [bins 22-27], ttbar mass - $m^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 28-37], ttbar pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 38-43], ttbar rapidity - $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ [bins 44-49], chi ttbar - ${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 50-56], delta phi ttbar - ${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ [bins 57-60], ttbar out of plane momentum - $|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ [bins 61-67], yboost ttbar - $|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ [68-74], cos theta star - $|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ [bins 75-80], HT ttbar - $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 81-87].
Statistical correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section of all 13 variables at particle level. The observables are arranged as follows: leading top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ [bins 1-8], leading top rapidity - $|y^{t,1}|$ [bins 9-14], subleading top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ [bins 15-21], subleading top rapidity - $|y^{t,2}|$ [bins 22-27], ttbar mass - $m^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 28-37], ttbar pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 38-43], ttbar rapidity - $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ [bins 44-49], chi ttbar - ${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 50-56], delta phi ttbar - ${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ [bins 57-60], ttbar out of plane momentum - $|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ [bins 61-67], yboost ttbar - $|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ [68-74], cos theta star - $|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ [bins 75-80], HT ttbar - $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 81-87].
${p_{{T}}}^{t}$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|y^{t}|$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|y^{t,1}|$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{y_{B}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{p_{out}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${H_{T}}^{t\bar{t}}$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${p_{{T}}}^{t}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|y^{t}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|y^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{y_{B}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{p_{out}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
$|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level. The parton level phase-space is limited to the region $p_T^{t,1} > 500~$GeV, $p_T^{t,2} > 350~$GeV.
${p_{{T}}}^{t}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|y^{t}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in parton level
$|y^{t}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|y^{t}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section in parton level
$|y^{t}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|y^{t,1}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|y^{t,1}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|y^{t,1}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|y^{t,1}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y}^{t,2}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$m^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y_{B}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y_{B}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y_{B}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{y_{B}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{p_{out}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{p_{out}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{p_{out}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{p_{out}}^{t\bar{t}}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level
$|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
$|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level
Statistical correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section of all 15 variables at parton level. The observables are arranged as follows: random top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t}$ [bins 1-8], random top rapidity - $|y^{t}|$ [bins 9-16], leading top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ [bins 17-24], leading top rapidity - $|y^{t,1}|$ [bins 25-32], subleading top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ [bins 33-39], subleading top rapidity - $|y^{t,2}|$ [bins 40-46], ttbar mass - $m^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 48-57], ttbar pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 58-63], ttbar rapidity - $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ [bins 66-71], chi ttbar ${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ - [bins 74-80], delta phi ttbar - ${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ [bins 81-84], ttbar out of plane momentum - $|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ [bins 85-91], yboost ttbar - $|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ [92-98], cos theta star - $|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ [bins 99-104], HT ttbar $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 105-114].
Statistical correlation matrix for the normalized differential cross-section of all 15 variables at parton level. The observables are arranged as follows: random top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t}$ [bins 1-8], random top rapidity - $|y^{t}|$ [bins 9-16], leading top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t,1}$ [bins 17-24], leading top rapidity - $|y^{t,1}|$ [bins 25-32], subleading top pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t,2}$ [bins 33-39], subleading top rapidity - $|y^{t,2}|$ [bins 40-46], ttbar mass - $m^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 48-57], ttbar pT - ${p_{{T}}}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 58-63], ttbar rapidity - $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ [bins 66-71], chi ttbar ${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ - [bins 74-80], delta phi ttbar - ${\Delta\phi}(t_1,t_2)$ [bins 81-84], ttbar out of plane momentum - $|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ [bins 85-91],yboost ttbar - $|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ [92-98], cos theta star - $|{\cos{\theta}^{\star}}|$ [bins 99-104], HT ttbar $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ [bins 105-114].
The dynamics of isolated-photon production in association with a jet in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV are studied with the ATLAS detector at the LHC using a dataset with an integrated luminosity of 3.2 fb$^{-1}$. Photons are required to have transverse energies above 125 GeV. Jets are identified using the anti-$k_t$ algorithm with radius parameter $R=0.4$ and required to have transverse momenta above 100 GeV. Measurements of isolated-photon plus jet cross sections are presented as functions of the leading-photon transverse energy, the leading-jet transverse momentum, the azimuthal angular separation between the photon and the jet, the photon-jet invariant mass and the scattering angle in the photon-jet centre-of-mass system. Tree-level plus parton-shower predictions from SHERPA and PYTHIA as well as next-to-leading-order QCD predictions from JETPHOX and SHERPA are compared to the measurements.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus jet production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus jet production as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm jet-lead}$.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus jet production as a function of $\Delta\phi^{\rm \gamma-jet\ lead}$.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus jet production as a function of $m^{\gamma-\rm jet}$.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus jet production as a function of $|\cos\theta^{\star}|$.
A search for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles in scenarios with compressed mass spectra in final states with two low-momentum leptons and missing transverse momentum is presented. This search uses proton-proton collision data recorded by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider in 2015-2016, corresponding to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV. Events with same-flavor pairs of electrons or muons with opposite electric charge are selected. The data are found to be consistent with the Standard Model prediction. Results are interpreted using simplified models of R-parity-conserving supersymmetry in which there is a small mass difference between the masses of the produced supersymmetric particles and the lightest neutralino. Exclusion limits at 95% confidence level are set on next-to-lightest neutralino masses of up to 145 GeV for Higgsino production and 175 GeV for wino production, and slepton masses of up to 190 GeV for pair production of sleptons. In the compressed mass regime, the exclusion limits extend down to mass splittings of 2.5 GeV for Higgsino production, 2 GeV for wino production, and 1 GeV for slepton production. The results are also interpreted in the context of a radiatively-driven natural supersymmetry model with non-universal Higgs boson masses.
<b>Kinematics 1</b> Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data as well as the expected background in the inclusive electroweakino SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> [1, 60] (top) and slepton SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> [100, ∞] (bottom) signal regions. The arrow in the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup>/H<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup> variables indicates the minimum value of the requirement imposed in the final SR selection. The m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and m<sub>T2</sub> distributions (right) have all the SR requirements applied. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow. The dashed lines represent benchmark signal samples corresponding to the Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ simplified models. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 1</b> Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data as well as the expected background in the inclusive electroweakino SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> [1, 60] (top) and slepton SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> [100, ∞] (bottom) signal regions. The arrow in the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup>/H<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup> variables indicates the minimum value of the requirement imposed in the final SR selection. The m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and m<sub>T2</sub> distributions (right) have all the SR requirements applied. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow. The dashed lines represent benchmark signal samples corresponding to the Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ simplified models. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 2</b> Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data as well as the expected background in the inclusive electroweakino SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> [1, 60] (top) and slepton SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> [100, ∞] (bottom) signal regions. The arrow in the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup>/H<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup> variables indicates the minimum value of the requirement imposed in the final SR selection. The m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and m<sub>T2</sub> distributions (right) have all the SR requirements applied. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow. The dashed lines represent benchmark signal samples corresponding to the Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ simplified models. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 2</b> Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data as well as the expected background in the inclusive electroweakino SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> [1, 60] (top) and slepton SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> [100, ∞] (bottom) signal regions. The arrow in the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup>/H<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup> variables indicates the minimum value of the requirement imposed in the final SR selection. The m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and m<sub>T2</sub> distributions (right) have all the SR requirements applied. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow. The dashed lines represent benchmark signal samples corresponding to the Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ simplified models. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 3</b> Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data as well as the expected background in the inclusive electroweakino SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> [1, 60] (top) and slepton SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> [100, ∞] (bottom) signal regions. The arrow in the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup>/H<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup> variables indicates the minimum value of the requirement imposed in the final SR selection. The m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and m<sub>T2</sub> distributions (right) have all the SR requirements applied. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow. The dashed lines represent benchmark signal samples corresponding to the Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ simplified models. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 3</b> Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data as well as the expected background in the inclusive electroweakino SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> [1, 60] (top) and slepton SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> [100, ∞] (bottom) signal regions. The arrow in the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup>/H<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup> variables indicates the minimum value of the requirement imposed in the final SR selection. The m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and m<sub>T2</sub> distributions (right) have all the SR requirements applied. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow. The dashed lines represent benchmark signal samples corresponding to the Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ simplified models. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 4</b> Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data as well as the expected background in the inclusive electroweakino SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> [1, 60] (top) and slepton SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> [100, ∞] (bottom) signal regions. The arrow in the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup>/H<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup> variables indicates the minimum value of the requirement imposed in the final SR selection. The m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and m<sub>T2</sub> distributions (right) have all the SR requirements applied. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow. The dashed lines represent benchmark signal samples corresponding to the Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ simplified models. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 4</b> Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data as well as the expected background in the inclusive electroweakino SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> [1, 60] (top) and slepton SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> [100, ∞] (bottom) signal regions. The arrow in the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup>/H<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup> variables indicates the minimum value of the requirement imposed in the final SR selection. The m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and m<sub>T2</sub> distributions (right) have all the SR requirements applied. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow. The dashed lines represent benchmark signal samples corresponding to the Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ simplified models. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Exclusion 1 (exp)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with pm1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with pm1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct Higgsino (top) and wino (bottom) production. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. For Higgsino production, the chargino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup> mass is assumed to be halfway between the two lightest neutralino masses, while m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) = m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup>) is assumed for the wino--bino model. The gray regions denote the lower chargino mass limit from LEP [20]. The blue region in the lower plot indicates the limit from the 2ℓ+3ℓ combination of ATLAS Run 1 [41,42].
<b>Exclusion 1 (exp)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with pm1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with pm1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct Higgsino (top) and wino (bottom) production. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. For Higgsino production, the chargino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup> mass is assumed to be halfway between the two lightest neutralino masses, while m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) = m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup>) is assumed for the wino--bino model. The gray regions denote the lower chargino mass limit from LEP [20]. The blue region in the lower plot indicates the limit from the 2ℓ+3ℓ combination of ATLAS Run 1 [41,42].
<b>Exclusion 1 (obs)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with pm1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with pm1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct Higgsino (top) and wino (bottom) production. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. For Higgsino production, the chargino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup> mass is assumed to be halfway between the two lightest neutralino masses, while m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) = m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup>) is assumed for the wino--bino model. The gray regions denote the lower chargino mass limit from LEP [20]. The blue region in the lower plot indicates the limit from the 2ℓ+3ℓ combination of ATLAS Run 1 [41,42].
<b>Exclusion 1 (obs)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with pm1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with pm1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct Higgsino (top) and wino (bottom) production. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. For Higgsino production, the chargino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup> mass is assumed to be halfway between the two lightest neutralino masses, while m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) = m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup>) is assumed for the wino--bino model. The gray regions denote the lower chargino mass limit from LEP [20]. The blue region in the lower plot indicates the limit from the 2ℓ+3ℓ combination of ATLAS Run 1 [41,42].
<b>Exclusion 2 (exp)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with pm1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with pm1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct Higgsino (top) and wino (bottom) production. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. For Higgsino production, the chargino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup> mass is assumed to be halfway between the two lightest neutralino masses, while m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) = m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup>) is assumed for the wino--bino model. The gray regions denote the lower chargino mass limit from LEP [20]. The blue region in the lower plot indicates the limit from the 2ℓ+3ℓ combination of ATLAS Run 1 [41,42].
<b>Exclusion 2 (exp)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with pm1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with pm1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct Higgsino (top) and wino (bottom) production. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. For Higgsino production, the chargino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup> mass is assumed to be halfway between the two lightest neutralino masses, while m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) = m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup>) is assumed for the wino--bino model. The gray regions denote the lower chargino mass limit from LEP [20]. The blue region in the lower plot indicates the limit from the 2ℓ+3ℓ combination of ATLAS Run 1 [41,42].
<b>Exclusion 2 (obs)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with pm1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with pm1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct Higgsino (top) and wino (bottom) production. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. For Higgsino production, the chargino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup> mass is assumed to be halfway between the two lightest neutralino masses, while m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) = m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup>) is assumed for the wino--bino model. The gray regions denote the lower chargino mass limit from LEP [20]. The blue region in the lower plot indicates the limit from the 2ℓ+3ℓ combination of ATLAS Run 1 [41,42].
<b>Exclusion 2 (obs)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with pm1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with pm1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct Higgsino (top) and wino (bottom) production. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. For Higgsino production, the chargino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup> mass is assumed to be halfway between the two lightest neutralino masses, while m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) = m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>pm</sup>) is assumed for the wino--bino model. The gray regions denote the lower chargino mass limit from LEP [20]. The blue region in the lower plot indicates the limit from the 2ℓ+3ℓ combination of ATLAS Run 1 [41,42].
<b>Exclusion 3 (exp)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with ± 1 σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with ± 1 σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct slepton production. A fit of slepton signals to the m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(ℓ̃, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(ℓ̃) plane. Slepton ℓ̃ refers to the scalar partners of left- and right-handed electrons and muons, which are assumed to be fourfold mass degenerate m(ẽ<sub>L</sub>) = m(ẽ<sub>R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>R</sub>). The gray region is the ẽ<sub>R</sub> limit from LEP [20,24], while the blue region is the fourfold mass degenerate slepton limit from ATLAS Run 1 [41].
<b>Exclusion 3 (exp)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with ± 1 σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with ± 1 σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct slepton production. A fit of slepton signals to the m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(ℓ̃, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(ℓ̃) plane. Slepton ℓ̃ refers to the scalar partners of left- and right-handed electrons and muons, which are assumed to be fourfold mass degenerate m(ẽ<sub>L</sub>) = m(ẽ<sub>R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>R</sub>). The gray region is the ẽ<sub>R</sub> limit from LEP [20,24], while the blue region is the fourfold mass degenerate slepton limit from ATLAS Run 1 [41].
<b>Exclusion 3 (obs)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with ± 1 σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with ± 1 σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct slepton production. A fit of slepton signals to the m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(ℓ̃, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(ℓ̃) plane. Slepton ℓ̃ refers to the scalar partners of left- and right-handed electrons and muons, which are assumed to be fourfold mass degenerate m(ẽ<sub>L</sub>) = m(ẽ<sub>R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>R</sub>). The gray region is the ẽ<sub>R</sub> limit from LEP [20,24], while the blue region is the fourfold mass degenerate slepton limit from ATLAS Run 1 [41].
<b>Exclusion 3 (obs)</b> Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity (blue dashed line) with ± 1 σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and observed limits (red solid line) with ± 1 σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red line) from signal cross-section uncertainties for simplified models of direct slepton production. A fit of slepton signals to the m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> spectrum is used to derive the limit, which is projected into the Δ m(ℓ̃, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs. m(ℓ̃) plane. Slepton ℓ̃ refers to the scalar partners of left- and right-handed electrons and muons, which are assumed to be fourfold mass degenerate m(ẽ<sub>L</sub>) = m(ẽ<sub>R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>R</sub>). The gray region is the ẽ<sub>R</sub> limit from LEP [20,24], while the blue region is the fourfold mass degenerate slepton limit from ATLAS Run 1 [41].
<b>Upper Limits 1</b> The first two columns present observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) event yields in the inclusive signal regions. The latter are obtained by the background-only fit of the control regions, and the errors include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The next two columns show the observed 95% CL upper limits on the visible cross-section (⟨εσ⟩<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows what the 95% CL upper limit on the number of signal events would be, given an observed number of events equal to the expected number (and +- 1 σ deviations from the expectation) of background events. The last column indicates the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)), which is capped at 0.5.
<b>Upper Limits 1</b> The first two columns present observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) event yields in the inclusive signal regions. The latter are obtained by the background-only fit of the control regions, and the errors include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The next two columns show the observed 95% CL upper limits on the visible cross-section (⟨εσ⟩<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows what the 95% CL upper limit on the number of signal events would be, given an observed number of events equal to the expected number (and +- 1 σ deviations from the expectation) of background events. The last column indicates the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)), which is capped at 0.5.
<b>Cutflow 1</b> Observed event yields and exclusion fit results with the signal strength parameter set to zero for the exclusive electroweakino and slepton signal regions. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. Uncertainties in the fitted background estimates combine statistical and systematic uncertainties.
<b>Cutflow 1</b> Observed event yields and exclusion fit results with the signal strength parameter set to zero for the exclusive electroweakino and slepton signal regions. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. Uncertainties in the fitted background estimates combine statistical and systematic uncertainties.
<b>Acceptances 1</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 1</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 2</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 2</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 3</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 3</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 4</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 4</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 5</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 5</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 6</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 6</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 7</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 7</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 8</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 8</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 9</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 9</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 10</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 10</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 11</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 11</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 12</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 12</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 13</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 13</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 14</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 14</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 15</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 15</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 16</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 16</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 17</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 17</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 18</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 18</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 19</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 19</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 20</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 20</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 21</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 21</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 22</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 22</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 23</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 23</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 24</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 24</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 25</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 25</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 26</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 26</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 27</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 27</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 28</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 28</b> Truth acceptances for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>4</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 29</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 29</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 30</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 30</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 31</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 31</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 32</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 32</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 33</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 33</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 34</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Acceptances 34</b> Truth acceptances for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Numbers overlaid on the mass planes are the acceptance × 10<sup>3</sup>.
<b>Efficiencies 1</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 1</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 2</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 2</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 3</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 3</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 4</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 4</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 5</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 5</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 6</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 6</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 7</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 7</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 8</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 8</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 9</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 9</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 10</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 10</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 11</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 11</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 12</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 12</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 13</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 13</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 14</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 14</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 15</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 15</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 16</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 16</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 17</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 17</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 18</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 18</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 19</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 19</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 20</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 20</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 21</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 21</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 22</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 22</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 23</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 23</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 24</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 24</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 25</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 25</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 26</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 26</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 27</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 27</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 28</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 28</b> Efficiencies for the Higgsino χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> production process in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 29</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 29</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 30</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 30</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 31</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 31</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 32</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 32</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 33</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 33</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 34</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Efficiencies 34</b> Efficiencies for the ℓ̃ℓ̃ production in the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Efficiencies are computed as the ``acceptance times efficiency" divided by the acceptance. The black line indicates the maximum allowed value of Δ m or m<sub>T2</sub> for the inclusive signal region under study.
<b>Cross-Sections 1</b> Cross-sections of the Higgsino signal grid for each production process denoted in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 1</b> Cross-sections of the Higgsino signal grid for each production process denoted in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 2</b> Cross-sections of the Higgsino signal grid for each production process denoted in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 2</b> Cross-sections of the Higgsino signal grid for each production process denoted in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 3</b> Cross-sections of the Higgsino signal grid for each production process denoted in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 3</b> Cross-sections of the Higgsino signal grid for each production process denoted in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 4</b> Cross-sections of the Higgsino signal grid for each production process denoted in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 4</b> Cross-sections of the Higgsino signal grid for each production process denoted in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 5</b> Cross-sections of the wino--bino signal grid for each production process in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 5</b> Cross-sections of the wino--bino signal grid for each production process in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 6</b> Cross-sections of the wino--bino signal grid for each production process in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 6</b> Cross-sections of the wino--bino signal grid for each production process in the caption.
<b>Cross-Sections 7</b> Total cross-sections of the slepton simplified model signal grid. Slepton refers to a the scalar partners of the left- and right-handed electrons and muons, which are assumed to be mass degenerate m(ẽ<sub>L</sub>) = m(ẽ<sub>R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>R</sub>).
<b>Cross-Sections 7</b> Total cross-sections of the slepton simplified model signal grid. Slepton refers to a the scalar partners of the left- and right-handed electrons and muons, which are assumed to be mass degenerate m(ẽ<sub>L</sub>) = m(ẽ<sub>R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>R</sub>).
<b>Kinematics 5</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 5</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 6</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 6</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 7</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 7</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 8</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 8</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 9</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 9</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 10</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 10</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 11</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 11</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 12</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 12</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 13</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 13</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 14</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 14</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 15</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Kinematics 15</b> Distributions after the background-only fit of kinematic variables used to define selections common to all signal regions, i.e. not including requirements specific to the electroweakino or slepton SR definitions. Blue arrows in the upper panel denote the final requirement used to define the common SR, otherwise all selections are applied. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). Benchmark Higgsino H̃ and slepton ℓ̃ signals are overlaid as dashed lines. Orange arrows in the Data/SM panel indicate values that are beyond the y-axis range.
<b>Upper Limits 2</b> Numbers show 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the inclusive Higgsino signal cross-sections.
<b>Upper Limits 2</b> Numbers show 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the inclusive Higgsino signal cross-sections.
<b>Upper Limits 3</b> Numbers show 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the inclusive Higgsino signal cross-sections.
<b>Upper Limits 3</b> Numbers show 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the inclusive Higgsino signal cross-sections.
<b>Upper Limits 4</b> Numbers show 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the inclusive signal cross-sections of the wino--bino model.
<b>Upper Limits 4</b> Numbers show 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the inclusive signal cross-sections of the wino--bino model.
<b>Upper Limits 5</b> Numbers show 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the inclusive signal cross-sections of the wino--bino model.
<b>Upper Limits 5</b> Numbers show 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the inclusive signal cross-sections of the wino--bino model.
<b>Upper Limits 6</b> Numbers show the 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the slepton signal cross-sections, assuming a fourfold mass degeneracy m(ẽ<sub>L,R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L,R</sub>).
<b>Upper Limits 6</b> Numbers show the 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the slepton signal cross-sections, assuming a fourfold mass degeneracy m(ẽ<sub>L,R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L,R</sub>).
<b>Upper Limits 7</b> Numbers show the 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the slepton signal cross-sections, assuming a fourfold mass degeneracy m(ẽ<sub>L,R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L,R</sub>).
<b>Upper Limits 7</b> Numbers show the 95% CL model-dependent upper limits on the slepton signal cross-sections, assuming a fourfold mass degeneracy m(ẽ<sub>L,R</sub>) = m(μ̃<sub>L,R</sub>).
<b>Upper Limits 8</b> Expected and observed 95% CL cross-section upper limits as a function of the universal gaugino mass m<sub>1/2</sub> for the NUHM2 model. The gray numbers indicate the values of the observed limit. The green and yellow bands around the expected limit indicate the ± 1σ and ± 2σ uncertainties, respectively. The expected signal production cross-sections as well as the associated uncertainty are indicated with the blue solid and dashed lines. The lower x-axis indicates the difference between the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> and χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> masses for different values of m<sub>1/2</sub>. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive this limit.
<b>Upper Limits 8</b> Expected and observed 95% CL cross-section upper limits as a function of the universal gaugino mass m<sub>1/2</sub> for the NUHM2 model. The gray numbers indicate the values of the observed limit. The green and yellow bands around the expected limit indicate the ± 1σ and ± 2σ uncertainties, respectively. The expected signal production cross-sections as well as the associated uncertainty are indicated with the blue solid and dashed lines. The lower x-axis indicates the difference between the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> and χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> masses for different values of m<sub>1/2</sub>. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive this limit.
<b>Upper Limits 9</b> Expected and observed 95% CL cross-section upper limits as a function of the universal gaugino mass m<sub>1/2</sub> for the NUHM2 model. The gray numbers indicate the values of the observed limit. The green and yellow bands around the expected limit indicate the ± 1σ and ± 2σ uncertainties, respectively. The expected signal production cross-sections as well as the associated uncertainty are indicated with the blue solid and dashed lines. The lower x-axis indicates the difference between the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> and χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> masses for different values of m<sub>1/2</sub>. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive this limit.
<b>Upper Limits 9</b> Expected and observed 95% CL cross-section upper limits as a function of the universal gaugino mass m<sub>1/2</sub> for the NUHM2 model. The gray numbers indicate the values of the observed limit. The green and yellow bands around the expected limit indicate the ± 1σ and ± 2σ uncertainties, respectively. The expected signal production cross-sections as well as the associated uncertainty are indicated with the blue solid and dashed lines. The lower x-axis indicates the difference between the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> and χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> masses for different values of m<sub>1/2</sub>. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive this limit.
<b>Upper Limits 10</b> Expected and observed 95% CL cross-section upper limits as a function of the universal gaugino mass m<sub>1/2</sub> for the NUHM2 model. The gray numbers indicate the values of the observed limit. The green and yellow bands around the expected limit indicate the ± 1σ and ± 2σ uncertainties, respectively. The expected signal production cross-sections as well as the associated uncertainty are indicated with the blue solid and dashed lines. The lower x-axis indicates the difference between the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> and χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> masses for different values of m<sub>1/2</sub>. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive this limit.
<b>Upper Limits 10</b> Expected and observed 95% CL cross-section upper limits as a function of the universal gaugino mass m<sub>1/2</sub> for the NUHM2 model. The gray numbers indicate the values of the observed limit. The green and yellow bands around the expected limit indicate the ± 1σ and ± 2σ uncertainties, respectively. The expected signal production cross-sections as well as the associated uncertainty are indicated with the blue solid and dashed lines. The lower x-axis indicates the difference between the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> and χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> masses for different values of m<sub>1/2</sub>. A fit of signals to the m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> spectrum is used to derive this limit.
<b>Cutflow 2</b> Observed event yields and exclusion fit results with the signal strength parameter set to zero for the exclusive electroweakino and slepton signal regions. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. Uncertainties in the fitted background estimates combine statistical and systematic uncertainties.
<b>Cutflow 2</b> Observed event yields and exclusion fit results with the signal strength parameter set to zero for the exclusive electroweakino and slepton signal regions. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. Uncertainties in the fitted background estimates combine statistical and systematic uncertainties.
<b>Cutflow 3</b> Observed event yields and background-only fit results for the inclusive electroweakino and slepton signal regions. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. Uncertainties in the fitted background estimates combine statistical and systematic uncertainties.
<b>Cutflow 3</b> Observed event yields and background-only fit results for the inclusive electroweakino and slepton signal regions. Background processes containing fewer than two prompt leptons are categorized as `Fake/nonprompt'. The category `Others' contains rare backgrounds from triboson, Higgs boson, and the remaining top-quark production processes listed in Table 1. Uncertainties in the fitted background estimates combine statistical and systematic uncertainties.
<b>Exclusion 4</b> Nominal observed and expected CLs values for Higgsino signals.
<b>Exclusion 4</b> Nominal observed and expected CLs values for Higgsino signals.
<b>Exclusion 5</b> Nominal observed and expected CLs values for wino--bino signals.
<b>Exclusion 5</b> Nominal observed and expected CLs values for wino--bino signals.
<b>Exclusion 6</b> Nominal observed and expected CLs values for slepton signals.
<b>Exclusion 6</b> Nominal observed and expected CLs values for slepton signals.
<b>Upper Limits 11</b> Upper limits on observed (expected) Higgsino simplified model signal cross section σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> and signal strength σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> / σ<sub>theory</sub>.
<b>Upper Limits 11</b> Upper limits on observed (expected) Higgsino simplified model signal cross section σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> and signal strength σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> / σ<sub>theory</sub>.
<b>Upper Limits 12</b> Upper limits on observed (expected) wino--bino simplified model signal cross section σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> and signal strength σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> / σ<sub>theory</sub>.
<b>Upper Limits 12</b> Upper limits on observed (expected) wino--bino simplified model signal cross section σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> and signal strength σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> / σ<sub>theory</sub>.
<b>Upper Limits 13</b> Upper limits on observed (expected) slepton simplified model signal cross section σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> and signal strength σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> / σ<sub>theory</sub>.
<b>Upper Limits 13</b> Upper limits on observed (expected) slepton simplified model signal cross section σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> and signal strength σ<sub>obs (exp)</sub><sup>95</sup> / σ<sub>theory</sub>.
<b>Cutflow 4</b> Event counts for Higgsino H and slepton ℓ signals after sequential selections for the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Weighted events are normalised to mathcalL = 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the inclusive cross section σ, while raw MC events are also shown. The generator filter with efficiency ε<sub>filt</sub> applied to the Higgsino signal requires truth E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> > 50 GeV and at least 2 leptons with p<sub>T</sub> > 3 GeV, while only the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> > 50 GeV requirement is applied to the slepton signal. The mathcalB refers to the branching ratio Z<sup>(*)</sup> → ℓ<sup>+</sup>ℓ<sup>-</sup> in the Higgsino processes. ``Lepton truth matching" requires that the selected leptons are consistent with being decay products of the SUSY process. ``Lepton author 16 veto" removes a class of electron candidates reconstructed with algorithms designed to identify photon conversions.
<b>Cutflow 4</b> Event counts for Higgsino H and slepton ℓ signals after sequential selections for the inclusive SRℓℓ-m<sub>ℓℓ</sub> and SRℓℓ-m<sub>T2</sub><sup>100</sup> regions. Weighted events are normalised to mathcalL = 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the inclusive cross section σ, while raw MC events are also shown. The generator filter with efficiency ε<sub>filt</sub> applied to the Higgsino signal requires truth E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> > 50 GeV and at least 2 leptons with p<sub>T</sub> > 3 GeV, while only the E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> > 50 GeV requirement is applied to the slepton signal. The mathcalB refers to the branching ratio Z<sup>(*)</sup> → ℓ<sup>+</sup>ℓ<sup>-</sup> in the Higgsino processes. ``Lepton truth matching" requires that the selected leptons are consistent with being decay products of the SUSY process. ``Lepton author 16 veto" removes a class of electron candidates reconstructed with algorithms designed to identify photon conversions.
<b>Cutflow 5</b> Event counts for the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> process of the Higgsino m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (110, 100) GeV signal and sequentially with each addition requirement for selections common to all signal regions (SRs), followed by those optimised for Higgsinos and sleptons. ``Lepton truth matching" requires that the selected leptons are consistent with being decay products of the SUSY process. ``Lepton author 16 veto" removes a class of electron candidates reconstructed with algorithms designed to identify photon conversions. Weighted events are normalised to 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the raw Monte Carlo events are also displayed.
<b>Cutflow 5</b> Event counts for the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup> process of the Higgsino m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (110, 100) GeV signal and sequentially with each addition requirement for selections common to all signal regions (SRs), followed by those optimised for Higgsinos and sleptons. ``Lepton truth matching" requires that the selected leptons are consistent with being decay products of the SUSY process. ``Lepton author 16 veto" removes a class of electron candidates reconstructed with algorithms designed to identify photon conversions. Weighted events are normalised to 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the raw Monte Carlo events are also displayed.
<b>Cutflow 6</b> Event counts for the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> process of the Higgsino m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (110, 100) GeV signal and sequentially with each addition requirement for selections common to all signal regions (SRs), followed by those optimised for Higgsinos and sleptons. ``Lepton truth matching" requires that the selected leptons are consistent with being decay products of the SUSY process. ``Lepton author 16 veto" removes a class of electron candidates reconstructed with algorithms designed to identify photon conversions. Weighted events are normalised to 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the raw Monte Carlo events are also displayed.
<b>Cutflow 6</b> Event counts for the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> process of the Higgsino m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (110, 100) GeV signal and sequentially with each addition requirement for selections common to all signal regions (SRs), followed by those optimised for Higgsinos and sleptons. ``Lepton truth matching" requires that the selected leptons are consistent with being decay products of the SUSY process. ``Lepton author 16 veto" removes a class of electron candidates reconstructed with algorithms designed to identify photon conversions. Weighted events are normalised to 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the raw Monte Carlo events are also displayed.
<b>Cutflow 7</b> Event counts for the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> process of the Higgsino m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (110, 100) GeV signal and sequentially with each addition requirement followed by those optimised for Higgsinos and sleptons. Weighted events are normalised to 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the raw Monte Carlo events are also displayed.
<b>Cutflow 7</b> Event counts for the χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup> process of the Higgsino m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (110, 100) GeV signal and sequentially with each addition requirement followed by those optimised for Higgsinos and sleptons. Weighted events are normalised to 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the raw Monte Carlo events are also displayed.
<b>Cutflow 8</b> Event counts for the χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> process of the Higgsino m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (110, 100) GeV signal and sequentially with each addition requirement for selections common to all signal regions (SRs). ``Lepton truth matching" requires that the selected leptons are consistent with being decay products of the SUSY process. ``Lepton author 16 veto" removes a class of electron candidates reconstructed with algorithms designed to identify photon conversions. Weighted events are normalised to 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the raw Monte Carlo events are also displayed.
<b>Cutflow 8</b> Event counts for the χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>+</sup>χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>-</sup> process of the Higgsino m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>, χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (110, 100) GeV signal and sequentially with each addition requirement for selections common to all signal regions (SRs). ``Lepton truth matching" requires that the selected leptons are consistent with being decay products of the SUSY process. ``Lepton author 16 veto" removes a class of electron candidates reconstructed with algorithms designed to identify photon conversions. Weighted events are normalised to 36.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> and the raw Monte Carlo events are also displayed.
A measurement of the production of three isolated photons in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}$ = 8 TeV is reported. The results are based on an integrated luminosity of 20.2 fb$^{-1}$ collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The differential cross sections are measured as functions of the transverse energy of each photon, the difference in azimuthal angle and in pseudorapidity between pairs of photons, the invariant mass of pairs of photons, and the invariant mass of the triphoton system. A measurement of the inclusive fiducial cross section is also reported. Next-to-leading-order perturbative QCD predictions are compared to the cross-section measurements. The predictions underestimate the measurement of the inclusive fiducial cross section and the differential measurements at low photon transverse energies and invariant masses. They provide adequate descriptions of the measurements at high values of the photon transverse energies, invariant mass of pairs of photons, and invariant mass of the triphoton system.
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of ET(Photon1).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of ET(Photon2).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of ET(Photon3).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of DPhi(Photon1,Photon2).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of DPhi(Photon1,Photon3).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of DPhi(Photon2,Photon3).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of |DEta(Photon1,Photon2)|.
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of |DEta(Photon1,Photon3)|.
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of |DEta(Photon2,Photon3)|.
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of M(Photon1,Photon2).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of M(Photon1,Photon3).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of M(Photon2,Photon3).
The three isolated photons cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties as a function of M(Photon1,Photon2,Photon3).
The inclusive and fiducial $t\bar{t}$ production cross-sections are measured in the lepton+jets channel using 20.2 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeV recorded with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Major systematic uncertainties due to the modelling of the jet energy scale and $b$-tagging efficiency are constrained by separating selected events into three disjoint regions. In order to reduce systematic uncertainties in the most important background, the W+jets process is modelled using Z+jets events in a data-driven approach. The inclusive $t\bar{t}$ cross-section is measured with a precision of 5.7% to be $\sigma_{\text{inc}}(t\bar{t})$ = 248.3 $\pm$ 0.7 (stat.) $\pm$ 13.4 (syst.) $\pm$ 4.7 (lumi.) pb, assuming a top-quark mass of 172.5 GeV. The result is in agreement with the Standard Model prediction. The cross-section is also measured in a phase space close to that of the selected data. The fiducial cross-section is $\sigma_{\text{fid}}(t\bar{t})$ = 48.8 $\pm$ 0.1 (stat.) $\pm$ 2.0 (syst.) $\pm$ 0.9 (lumi.) pb with a precision of 4.5%.
The measured inclusive cross section. The first systematic uncertainty (sys_1) is the combined systematic uncertainty excluding luminosity, the second (sys_2) is the luminosity
The measured fiducial cross section. The first systematic uncertainty (sys_1) is the combined systematic uncertainty excluding luminosity, the second (sys_2) is the luminosity
A search for heavy resonances decaying into a pair of $Z$ bosons leading to $\ell^+\ell^-\ell^+\ell^-$ and $\ell^+\ell^-\nu\bar\nu$ final states, where $\ell$ stands for either an electron or a muon, is presented. The search uses proton proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ collected with the ATLAS detector during 2015 and 2016 at the Large Hadron Collider. Different mass ranges for the hypothetical resonances are considered, depending on the final state and model. The different ranges span between 200 GeV and 2000 GeV. The results are interpreted as upper limits on the production cross section of a spin 0 or spin 2 resonance. The upper limits for the spin 0 resonance are translated to exclusion contours in the context of Type I and Type II two-Higgs-doublet models, while those for the spin 2 resonance are used to constrain the Randall Sundrum model with an extra dimension giving rise to spin 2 graviton excitations.
Distribution of the four-lepton invariant mass (m4l) in the four-lepton search for the ggF-enriched category.
Distribution of the four-lepton invariant mass (m4l) in the four-lepton search for the VBF-enriched category.
Transverse mass mT in the llnunu search for the electron channel.
Transverse mass mT in the llnunu search for the muon channel.
Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio as a function of the heavy resonance mass mH for the ggF production mode
Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio as a function of the heavy resonance mass mH for the VBF production mode
Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section for the ggF production model times branching ratio as a function of mH for an additioinal heavy scalar assuming a width of 1% of mH
Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section for the ggF production model times branching ratio as a function of mH for an additioinal heavy scalar assuming a width of 5% of mH
Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section for the ggF production model times branching ratio as a function of mH for an additioinal heavy scalar assuming a width of 10% of mH
Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for a KK graviton produced with k/M_{PI} = 1.
A search is conducted for new resonances decaying into a $W$ or $Z$ boson and a 125 GeV Higgs boson in the $\nu\bar{\nu}b\bar{b}$, $\ell^{\pm}{\nu}b\bar{b}$, and $\ell^+\ell^-b\bar{b}$ final states, where $\ell ^{\pm}= e^{\pm}$ or $\mu^{\pm}$, in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt s = 13$ TeV. The data used correspond to a total integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider during the 2015 and 2016 data-taking periods. The search is conducted by examining the reconstructed invariant or transverse mass distributions of $Wh$ and $Zh$ candidates for evidence of a localised excess in the mass range of 220 GeV up to 5 TeV. No significant excess is observed and the results are interpreted in terms of constraints on the production cross-section times branching fraction of heavy $W^\prime$ and $Z^\prime$ resonances in heavy-vector-triplet models and the CP-odd scalar boson $A$ in two-Higgs-doublet models. Upper limits are placed at the 95 % confidence level and range between $9.0\times 10^{-4}$ pb and $8.1\times 10^{-1}$ pb depending on the model and mass of the resonance.
Upper limits on Zprime to Z h production cross section x branching fraction in pb
Upper limits on Zprime to Z h production cross section x branching fraction in pb
Upper limits on Wprime to W h production cross section x branching fraction in pb
Upper limits on Wprime to W h production cross section x branching fraction in pb
Upper limits for the scaling factor of the production cross section for V’ times its branching fraction to Wh/Zh in Model A.
Upper limits for the scaling factor of the production cross section for V’ times its branching fraction to Wh/Zh in Model A.
Upper limits on A to Z h production cross section x branching fraction in pb (gluon fusion production)
Upper limits on A to Z h production cross section x branching fraction in pb (gluon fusion production)
Upper limits on A to Z h production cross section x branching fraction in pb ( production with associated b-quarks)
Upper limits on A to Z h production cross section x branching fraction in pb ( production with associated b-quarks)
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> Zprime
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> Zprime
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> Zprime
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> Zprime
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> Wprime
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> Wprime
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> A (gluon fusion)
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> A (gluon fusion)
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> A (gluon fusion)
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> A (gluon fusion)
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> A (b-quark associated)
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> A (b-quark associated)
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> A (b-quark associated)
Acceptance * Reconstruction efficiency for pp-> A (b-quark associated)
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 10%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 10%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 20%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 20%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 30%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 30%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 40%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 40%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 50%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 50%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 60%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 60%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 70%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 70%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 80%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 80%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 90%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 0% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 90%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 1% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 1% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 2% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 2% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 3% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 3% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 4% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 4% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 5% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 5% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 6% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 6% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 7% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 7% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 8% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 8% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 9% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 9% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 10% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 10% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 11% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the product of the production cross-section for pp->A and the branching fractions for A->Zh and h->bb evaluated by combining the 0-lepton and 2-lepton channels. The signal is smeared by a Breit-Wigner function with A boson width of 11% , assuming a combination of the gluon--gluon fusion and b-quark associated production modes with a bbA fraction of 0%.
Event distributions of mT,Vh for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of mT,Vh for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of m,Vh for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 1-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of m,Vh for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 2-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of mT,Vh for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved 1-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of m,Vh for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved 2-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of mT,Vh for the 0-lepton channel in the boosted 1-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of mT,Vh for the 0-lepton channel in the boosted 2-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of m,Vh for the 1-lepton channel in the boosted 1-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of m,Vh for the 1-lepton channel in the boosted 2-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of m,Vh for the 2-lepton channel in the boosted 1-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
Event distributions of m,Vh for the 2-lepton channel in the boosted 2-btag category. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood fit to the data.
The coupling properties of the Higgs boson are studied in the four-lepton decay channel using 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data from the LHC at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV collected by the ATLAS detector. Cross sections are measured for the four key production modes in several exclusive regions of the Higgs boson production phase space and are interpreted in terms of coupling modifiers. The inclusive cross section times branching ratio for $H \rightarrow ZZ^*$ decay and for a Higgs boson absolute rapidity below 2.5 is measured to be $1.73^{+0.24}_{-0.23}$(stat.)$^{+0.10}_{-0.08}$(exp.)$\pm 0.04$(th.) pb compared to the Standard Model prediction of $1.34\pm0.09$ pb. In addition, the tensor structure of the Higgs boson couplings is studied using an effective Lagrangian approach for the description of interactions beyond the Standard Model. Constraints are placed on the non-Standard-Model CP-even and CP-odd couplings to $Z$ bosons and on the CP-odd coupling to gluons.
The expected number of SM Higgs boson events with a mass mH= 125.09 GeV in the mass range 118 < m4l < 129 GeV for an integrated luminosity of 36.1/fb and sqrt(s)= 13 TeV in each reconstructed event category, shown separately for each Stage-0 production bin. The ggF and bbH contributions are shown separately but both contribute to the same (ggF) production bin. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The observed and expected numbers of signal and background events in the four-lepton decay channels for an integrated luminosity of 36.1/fb and at sqrt(s)= 13 TeV, assuming the SM Higgs boson signal with a mass m_{H} = 125.09 GeV . The second column shows the expected number of signal events for the full mass range while the subsequent columns correspond to the mass range of 118 < m4l < 129 GeV. In addition to the ZZ* background, the contribution of other backgrounds is shown, comprising the data-driven estimate from Table 4 and the simulation-based estimate of contributions from rare triboson and tbar{t}V processes. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The expected and observed numbers of signal events in reconstructed event categories for an integrated luminosity of 36.1/fb at sqrt(s)= 13 TeV, together with signal acceptances for each Stage-0 production mode. Results are obtained in bins of BDT discriminants using coarse binning with several bins merged into one. Signal acceptances less than 0.0001 are set to 0.
The observed values of Sigma*BR(H->ZZ*), the SM expected cross section sBRsm and their ratio Sigma*BR/(Sigma*BR)_SM for the inclusive production and in each Stage-0 and reduced Stage-1 production bin for an integrated luminosity of 36.1/fb and at sqrt(s)=13 TeV. The bbH contribution is considered as a part of the ggF production bins. The upper limits correspond to the 95% CL obtained with pseudo-experiments using the CL_s method. The uncertainties are given as (stat.)+(exp.)+(th.) for Stage 0 and as (stat.)+(syst.) for reduced Stage 1. Values without uncertainity are 95% CL upper limits.
Signal acceptance obtained as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events satisfying the event selection criteria in each reconstructed event category over the total number of events generated in the phase space specified by a given reduced Stage-1 ggF production bin. Results are obtained in bins of BDT discriminants using coarse binning with several bins merged into one. Values less than 0.0001 are set to 0.
Signal acceptance obtained as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events satisfying the event selection criteria in each reconstructed event category over the total number of events generated in the phase space specified by the given reduced Stage-1 VBF and VH production bins. Results are obtained in bins of BDT discriminants using coarse binning with several bins merged into one. Values less than 0.0001 are set to 0.
The signal strengths mu for the inclusive production and in each Stage-0 and reduced Stage-1 production bin for an integrated luminosity of 36.1/fb and at sqrt(s)=13 TeV. The bbH contribution is considered as a part of the ggF production bins. The upper limits correspond to the 95% CL obtained with pseudo-experiments using the CL_s method. The uncertainties are given as (stat.)+(exp.)+(th.) for Stage 0 and as (stat.)+(syst.) for reduced Stage 1. Values without uncertainity are 95% CL upper limits.
Signal acceptance (in percent) obtained as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events satisfying the event selection criteria in each reconstructed event category to the total number of generated events, as predicted by the MadGraph5_aMC@NLO generator assuming the SM coupling tensor structure or the BSM tensor structure with ($\kappa_{SM}$ = 1, | $\kappa_{AVV}$ | $\neq$ 0).
Number of expected ggF Higgs boson events for an integrated luminosity of $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV, as predicted by the MadGraph5_aMC@NLO generator assuming the SM coupling tensor structure or the BSM tensor structure with ($\kappa_{SM}=1$, $|\kappa_{Avv}|=6$). The highest-order SM predicition for the sum of the ggF, ttH and bbH contributions is also shown for comparison.
Number of expected VBF and VH Higgs boson events for an integrated luminosity of $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV, as predicted by the MadGraph5_aMC@NLO generator assuming the SM coupling tensor structure or the BSM tensor structure with ($\kappa_{SM}=1$, $|\kappa_{Avv}|=5$). The highest-order SM predicition for the sum of the VBF and VH contributions is also shown for comparison.
Expected Correlation Matrix for Stage 0
Observed Correlation Matrix for Stage 0. As upper limits are derived for ttH and VH POIs using the observed data, the corresponding terms inside the matrix are set to zero.
Expected Correlation Matrix for Reduced Stage 1
Observed Correlation Matrix for Reduced Stage 1. As upper limits are derived for ttH and VH POIs using the observed data, the corresponding terms inside the matrix are set to zero.
Expected Covariance Matrix for Stage 0
Observed Covariance Matrix for Stage 0. As upper limits are derived for ttH and VH POIs using the observed data, the corresponding terms inside the matrix are set to zero.
Expected Covariance Matrix for Reduced Stage 1
Observed Covariance Matrix for Reduced Stage 1. As upper limits are derived for ttH and VH POIs using the observed data, the corresponding terms inside the matrix are set to zero.
Likelihood contours at 68% CL in the (Sigma_ggF*B , Sigma_VBF*B ) plane
Likelihood contours at 95% CL in the (Sigma_ggF*B , Sigma_VBF*B ) plane
Expected two-dimensional negative log-likelihood scans for $\kappa_{HVV}$ versus $\kappa_{AVV}$ coupling parameters using $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ of data and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV. The couplings $\kappa_{Hgg}$ and $\kappa_{SM}$ are fixed to the SM value of one in the fit. The 95% CL exclusion limits are shown.
Observed two-dimensional negative log-likelihood scans for $\kappa_{HVV}$ versus $\kappa_{AVV}$ coupling parameters using $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ of data and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV. The couplings $\kappa_{Hgg}$ and $\kappa_{SM}$ are fixed to the SM value of one in the fit. The 95% CL exclusion limits are shown.
Expected two-dimensional negative log-likelihood scans for $\kappa_{HVV}$ versus $\kappa_{AVV}$ coupling parameters using $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ of data and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV. The coupling $\kappa_{Hgg}$ is fixed to the SM value of one in the fit. The coupling $\kappa_{SM}$ is left as a free parameter of the fit. The 95% CL exclusion limits are shown.
Observed two-dimensional negative log-likelihood scans for $\kappa_{HVV}$ versus $\kappa_{AVV}$ coupling parameters using $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ of data and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV. The coupling $\kappa_{Hgg}$ is fixed to the SM value of one in the fit. The coupling $\kappa_{SM}$ is left as a free parameter of the fit. The 95% CL exclusion limits are shown.
Expected two-dimensional negative log-likelihood scans for $\kappa_{HVV}$ versus $\kappa_{SM}$ coupling parameters using $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ of data and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV. The 95% CL exclusion limits are shown.
Observed two-dimensional negative log-likelihood scans for $\kappa_{HVV}$ versus $\kappa_{SM}$ coupling parameters using $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ of data and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV. The 95% CL exclusion limits are shown.
Expected two-dimensional negative log-likelihood scans for $\kappa_{AVV}$ versus $\kappa_{SM}$ coupling parameters using $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ of data and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV. The 95% CL exclusion limits are shown.
Observed two-dimensional negative log-likelihood scans for $\kappa_{AVV}$ versus $\kappa_{SM}$ coupling parameters using $\mathcal L=36.1 \text{fb}^{-1}$ of data and at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}}=13$ TeV. The 95% CL exclusion limits are shown.
This paper presents a search for direct electroweak gaugino or gluino pair production with a chargino nearly mass-degenerate with a stable neutralino. It is based on an integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV collected by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The final state of interest is a disappearing track accompanied by at least one jet with high transverse momentum from initial-state radiation or by four jets from the gluino decay chain. The use of short track segments reconstructed from the innermost tracking layers significantly improves the sensitivity to short chargino lifetimes. The results are found to be consistent with Standard Model predictions. Exclusion limits are set at 95% confidence level on the mass of charginos and gluinos for different chargino lifetimes. For a pure wino with a lifetime of about 0.2 ns, chargino masses up to 460 GeV are excluded. For the strong production channel, gluino masses up to 1.65 TeV are excluded assuming a chargino mass of 460 GeV and lifetime of 0.2 ns.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Model dependent upper limits on cross-section (fb) for the electroweak production are shown by grey numbers in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Model dependent upper limits on cross-section (pb) for the electroweak production are shown by grey numbers in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Model dependent upper limits on cross-section (pb) for the electroweak production are shown by grey numbers in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Model dependent upper limits on cross-section (pb) for the electroweak production are shown by grey numbers in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Model dependent upper limits on cross-section (pb) for the electroweak production are shown by grey numbers in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the electroweak channel. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is defined as the probability of an event passing the signal region selection when an electroweak gaugino pair is produced in a pp collision.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the electroweak channel. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is defined as the probability of an event passing the signal region selection when an electroweak gaugino pair is produced in a pp collision.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the electroweak channel. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is defined as the probability of an event passing the signal region selection when an electroweak gaugino pair is produced in a pp collision.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the electroweak channel. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is defined as the probability of an event passing the signal region selection when an electroweak gaugino pair is produced in a pp collision.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the electroweak channel. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is defined as the probability of an event passing the signal region selection when an electroweak gaugino pair is produced in a pp collision.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the strong channel. In white regions, no simulation sample is available. The left-upper triangle region is not allowed kinematically in wino-LSP scenarios. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is calculated relative to events in which the gluinos decay into electroweak gaugino pairs.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the strong channel. In white regions, no simulation sample is available. The left-upper triangle region is not allowed kinematically in wino-LSP scenarios. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is calculated relative to events in which the gluinos decay into electroweak gaugino pairs.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the strong channel. In white regions, no simulation sample is available. The left-upper triangle region is not allowed kinematically in wino-LSP scenarios. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is calculated relative to events in which the gluinos decay into electroweak gaugino pairs.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the strong channel. In white regions, no simulation sample is available. The left-upper triangle region is not allowed kinematically in wino-LSP scenarios. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is calculated relative to events in which the gluinos decay into electroweak gaugino pairs.
Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the strong channel. In white regions, no simulation sample is available. The left-upper triangle region is not allowed kinematically in wino-LSP scenarios. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is calculated relative to events in which the gluinos decay into electroweak gaugino pairs.
The generator-level acceptance after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos as a function of the chargino $eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance for charginos produced in the electroweak channel as a function of the chargino $eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance for charginos produced in the electroweak channel as a function of the chargino $eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance for charginos produced in the electroweak channel as a function of the chargino $eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance for charginos produced in the electroweak channel as a function of the chargino $eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos produced in the electroweak channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos produced in the electroweak channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos produced in the electroweak channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos produced in the electroweak channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The generator-level acceptance after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance for charginos produced in the strong channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance for charginos produced in the strong channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance for charginos produced in the strong channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance for charginos produced in the strong channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).
The generator-level acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos produced in the strong channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos produced in the strong channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos produced in the strong channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos produced in the strong channel as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in direct electroweak production with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in direct electroweak production with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in direct electroweak production with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in direct electroweak production with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in direct electroweak production with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in the strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in the strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in the strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in the strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in the strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few electroweak signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few electroweak signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few electroweak signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few electroweak signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few electroweak signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few strong signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few strong signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few strong signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few strong signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few strong signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.
Systematic uncertainties in the signal event yields at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. The uncertainty in the cross-section of the strong production is large due to the large effect from the PDF uncertainty.
Systematic uncertainties in the signal event yields at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. The uncertainty in the cross-section of the strong production is large due to the large effect from the PDF uncertainty.
Systematic uncertainties in the signal event yields at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. The uncertainty in the cross-section of the strong production is large due to the large effect from the PDF uncertainty.
Systematic uncertainties in the signal event yields at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. The uncertainty in the cross-section of the strong production is large due to the large effect from the PDF uncertainty.
Systematic uncertainties in the signal event yields at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. The uncertainty in the cross-section of the strong production is large due to the large effect from the PDF uncertainty.
Observed events, expected background for null signal, and expected signal yields for two benchmark models: electroweak channel with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) and strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. Also shown are the probability of a background-only experiment being more signal-like than observed ($p_0$) and the upper limit on the model-independent visible cross-section at 95\% CL. The uncertainty in the total background yield is different from the sum of uncertainties in quadrature due to anticorrelation between different backgrounds.
Observed events, expected background for null signal, and expected signal yields for two benchmark models: electroweak channel with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) and strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. Also shown are the probability of a background-only experiment being more signal-like than observed ($p_0$) and the upper limit on the model-independent visible cross-section at 95\% CL. The uncertainty in the total background yield is different from the sum of uncertainties in quadrature due to anti-correlation between different backgrounds.
Observed events, expected background for null signal, and expected signal yields for two benchmark models: electroweak channel with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) and strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. Also shown are the probability of a background-only experiment being more signal-like than observed ($p_0$) and the upper limit on the model-independent visible cross-section at 95\% CL. The uncertainty in the total background yield is different from the sum of uncertainties in quadrature due to anti-correlation between different backgrounds.
Observed events, expected background for null signal, and expected signal yields for two benchmark models: electroweak channel with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) and strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. Also shown are the probability of a background-only experiment being more signal-like than observed ($p_0$) and the upper limit on the model-independent visible cross-section at 95\% CL. The uncertainty in the total background yield is different from the sum of uncertainties in quadrature due to anti-correlation between different backgrounds.
Observed events, expected background for null signal, and expected signal yields for two benchmark models: electroweak channel with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) and strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. Also shown are the probability of a background-only experiment being more signal-like than observed ($p_0$) and the upper limit on the model-independent visible cross-section at 95\% CL. The uncertainty in the total background yield is different from the sum of uncertainties in quadrature due to anti-correlation between different backgrounds.
Effects of systematic uncertainties on the signal exclusion significance at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. Effects of uncertainties on the fake-tracklet background is smaller in the strong channel analysis because the estimated number of the fake-tracket background events is small.
Effects of systematic uncertainties on the signal exclusion significance at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. Effects of uncertainties on the fake-tracklet background is smaller in the strong channel analysis because the estimated number of the fake-tracklet background events is small.
Effects of systematic uncertainties on the signal exclusion significance at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. Effects of uncertainties on the fake-tracklet background is smaller in the strong channel analysis because the estimated number of the fake-tracklet background events is small.
Effects of systematic uncertainties on the signal exclusion significance at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. Effects of uncertainties on the fake-tracklet background is smaller in the strong channel analysis because the estimated number of the fake-tracklet background events is small.
Effects of systematic uncertainties on the signal exclusion significance at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. Effects of uncertainties on the fake-tracklet background is smaller in the strong channel analysis because the estimated number of the fake-tracklet background events is small.
Cross-section upper limits for the strong production, presented in unit of fb. Left-upper triangle region is unphysical because the wino mass is larger than the gluino mass.
Cross-section upper limits for the strong production, presented in unit of fb. Left-upper triangle region is unphysical because the wino mass is larger than the gluino mass.
Cross-section upper limits for the strong production, presented in unit of fb. Left-upper triangle region is unphysical because the wino mass is larger than the gluino mass.
Cross-section upper limits for the strong production, presented in unit of fb. Left-upper triangle region is unphysical because the wino mass is larger than the gluino mass.
Cross-section upper limits for the strong production, presented in unit of fb. Left-upper triangle region is unphysical because the wino mass is larger than the gluino mass.
A search for the supersymmetric partners of quarks and gluons (squarks and gluinos) in final states containing hadronic jets and missing transverse momentum, but no electrons or muons, is presented. The data used in this search were recorded in 2015 and 2016 by the ATLAS experiment in $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV proton--proton collisions at the Large Hadron Collider, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$. The results are interpreted in the context of various models where squarks and gluinos are pair-produced and the neutralino is the lightest supersymmetric particle. An exclusion limit at the 95\% confidence level on the mass of the gluino is set at 2.03 TeV for a simplified model incorporating only a gluino and the lightest neutralino, assuming the lightest neutralino is massless. For a simplified model involving the strong production of mass-degenerate first- and second-generation squarks, squark masses below 1.55 TeV are excluded if the lightest neutralino is massless. These limits substantially extend the region of supersymmetric parameter space previously excluded by searches with the ATLAS detector.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2j-2100. For signal, a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 600 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 595 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2j-2800. For signal, a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1500 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR4j-1000. For signal, a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 1300 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 900 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR4j-2200. For signal, a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 1800 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 800 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR6j-2600. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1705 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 865 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 25 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2jB-2400. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1600 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 1590 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 60 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2j-1200. For signal, a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 900 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 500 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2j-1600. For signal, a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1200 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 500 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2j-2000. For signal, a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1200 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2j-2400. For signal, a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1500 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2j-3600. For signal, a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1200 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR2jB-1600. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1600 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 1590 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 60 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR3j-1300. For signal, a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 600 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 595 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR4j-1400. For signal, a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 1800 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR4j-1800. For signal, a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 1800 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR4j-2600. For signal, a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 1800 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR4j-3000. For signal, a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 1800 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR5j-1600. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1705 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 865 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 25 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR5j-1700. For signal, a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 1800 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 0 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR5j-2000. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1705 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 865 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 25 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR5j-2600. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1705 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 865 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 25 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR6j-1200. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1705 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 865 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 25 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR6j-1800. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1705 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 865 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 25 GeV is shown.
Observed and expected background and signal effective mass distributions for SR6j-2200. For signal, a gluino onestep decay model where gluinos have mass of 1705 GeV, the chargino1 has mass of 865 GeV and the neutralino1 has mass of 25 GeV is shown.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from searches in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from searches on the light-flavor squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from searches on the light-flavor squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the light-flavor squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the light-flavor squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from RJR-based searches on the light-flavor squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from RJR-based searches on the light-flavor squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from searches in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from RJR-based searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from RJR-based searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay directly into the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from searches in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from searches on the squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from searches on the squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from RJR-based searches on the squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from RJR-based searches on the squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from Meff-based searches in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the squark mass and the mass gap ratio x in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the squark mass and the mass gap ratio x in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from searches in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from RJR-based searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from RJR-based searches on the gluino and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from Meff-based searches in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino mass and the mass gap ratio x in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino mass and the mass gap ratio x in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from Meff-based searches in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate the second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and second lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate the second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and second lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate the second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from Meff-based searches in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino or second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$, or $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z/h \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the squark mass and the mass gap ratio x in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino or second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$, or $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z/h \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the squark mass and the mass gap ratio x in a SUSY scenario where squarks are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino or second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow q W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$, or $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z/h \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from Meff-based searches in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino or second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$, or $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z/h \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino mass and the mass gap ratio x in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino or second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$, or $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z/h \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino mass and the mass gap ratio x in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay via an intermediate lightest chargino or second lightest neutralino to the lightest neutralino, $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} \rightarrow qq W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$, or $\tilde{g} \rightarrow qq \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} \rightarrow qq Z/h \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from Meff-based searches for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=0$ GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and squark masses for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=0$ GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and squark masses for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=0$ GeV.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from Meff-based searches for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=695$ GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and squark masses for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=695$ GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and squark masses for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=695$ GeV.
Observed 95% CL upper limit on the signal cross-section from Meff-based searches for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=995$ GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and squark masses for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=995$ GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours from Meff-based searches on the gluino and squark masses for inclusive squark-gluino production in pMSSM models with $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0}=995$ GeV.
Cut-flow of Meff-2j for three supersymmetric models: a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 2000 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 0 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (10000 generated events); and a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1200 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 600 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (20000 generated events); and a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1500 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 0 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cut-flow of Meff-3j,4j for three supersymmetric models: a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 2000 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 0 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (10000 generated events); and a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1200 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 600 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (20000 generated events); and a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1500 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 0 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cut-flow of Meff-5j,6j for three supersymmetric models: a gluino direct decay model where gluinos have mass of 2000 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 0 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (10000 generated events); and a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1200 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 600 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (20000 generated events); and a squark direct decay model where squarks have mass of 1500 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ and the $\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ has mass of 0 $\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V}$ (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cut-flow for RJR-based SR's targeting squarks for SS direct model points. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cut-flow for RJR-based SR's targeting gluinos for GG direct model points. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Cut-flow for RJR-based SR's targeting compressed mass-spectra signals for SS direct and GG direct model points. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-1200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-3600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2100.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-3j-1300.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-2200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-3000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-1700.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-2000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-1200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-1800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-2200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2jB-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2jB-2400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S1a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S1b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S2a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S2b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S3a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S3b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C1.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C2.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C3.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C5.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G1a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G1b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G2a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G2b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G3a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G3b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-1200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-3600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2100.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-3j-1300.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-2200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-3000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-1700.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-2000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-1200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-1800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-2200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2jB-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2jB-2400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S1a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S1b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S2a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S2b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S3a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S3b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C1.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C2.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C3.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C5.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G1a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G1b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G2a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G2b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G3a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G3b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-1200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-3600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2100.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-3j-1300.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-2200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-3000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-5j-1700.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-5j-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-5j-2000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-5j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-6j-1200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-6j-1800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-6j-2200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-6j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2jB-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2jB-2400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S1a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S1b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S2a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S2b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S3a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S3b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C1.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C2.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C3.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C5.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G1a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G1b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G2a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G2b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G3a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G3b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-1200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-3600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2100.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-3j-1300.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-2200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-3000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-5j-1700.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-5j-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-5j-2000.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-5j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-6j-1200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-6j-1800.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-6j-2200.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-6j-2600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2jB-1600.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2jB-2400.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S1a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S1b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S2a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S2b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S3a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S3b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C1.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C2.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C3.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C4.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C5.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G1a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G1b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G2a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G2b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G3a.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G3b.
Signal region acceptance for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-1200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-3600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2100.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-3j-1300.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-2200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-3000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-1700.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-2000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-1200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-1800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-2200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2jB-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR Meff-2jB-2400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S1a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S1b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S2a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S2b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S3a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S3b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-S4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C1.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C2.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C3.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-C5.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G1a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G1b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G2a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G2b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G3a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G3b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and direct decays to a quark and neutralino in SR RJR-G4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-1200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-3600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2j-2100.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-3j-1300.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-1800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-2200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-4j-3000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-1700.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-2000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-5j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-1200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-1800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-2200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-6j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2jB-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR Meff-2jB-2400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S1a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S1b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S2a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S2b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S3a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S3b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-S4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C1.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C2.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C3.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-C5.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G1a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G1b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G2a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G2b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G3a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G3b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and direct decays to two quarks and neutralino in SR RJR-G4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-1200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-3600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2100.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-3j-1300.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-2200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-4j-3000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-5j-1700.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-5j-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-5j-2000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-5j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-6j-1200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-6j-1800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-6j-2200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-6j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2jB-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR Meff-2jB-2400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S1a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S1b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S2a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S2b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S3a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S3b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-S4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C1.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C2.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C3.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-C5.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G1a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G1b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G2a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G2b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G3a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G3b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with squark pair production and decays to a quark and chargino in SR RJR-G4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-1200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-3600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2j-2100.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-3j-1300.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-1800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-2200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-4j-3000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-5j-1700.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-5j-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-5j-2000.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-5j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-6j-1200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-6j-1800.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-6j-2200.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-6j-2600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2jB-1600.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR Meff-2jB-2400.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S1a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S1b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S2a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S2b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S3a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S3b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-S4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C1.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C2.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C3.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C4.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-C5.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G1a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G1b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G2a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G2b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G3a.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G3b.
Signal region efficiency for simplified model with gluino pair production and decays to two quarks and chargino in SR RJR-G4.
The differential cross-section for the production of a $W$ boson in association with a top quark is measured for several particle-level observables. The measurements are performed using 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC in 2015 and 2016. Differential cross-sections are measured in a fiducial phase space defined by the presence of two charged leptons and exactly one jet matched to a $b$-hadron, and are normalised with the fiducial cross-section. Results are found to be in good agreement with predictions from several Monte Carlo event generators.
Fiducial region definition.
Absolute cross-sections differential in E(b). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Absolute cross-sections differential in m(l1b). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Absolute cross-sections differential in m(l2b). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Absolute cross-sections differential in E(llb). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Absolute cross-sections differential in mT(llvvb). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Absolute cross-sections differential in m(llb). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Normalised cross-sections differential in E(b). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Normalised cross-sections differential in m(l1b). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Normalised cross-sections differential in m(l2b). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Normalised cross-sections differential in E(llb). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Normalised cross-sections differential in mT(llvvb). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
Normalised cross-sections differential in m(llb). Uncertainties are signed to show correlations.
The results of a search for the direct pair production of top squarks, the supersymmetric partner of the top quark, in final states with one isolated electron or muon, several energetic jets, and missing transverse momentum are reported. The analysis also targets spin-0 mediator models, where the mediator decays into a pair of dark-matter particles and is produced in association with a pair of top quarks. The search uses data from proton-proton collisions delivered by the Large Hadron Collider in 2015 and 2016 at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV and recorded by the ATLAS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36 fb$^{-1}$. A wide range of signal scenarios with different mass-splittings between the top squark, the lightest neutralino and possible intermediate supersymmetric particles are considered, including cases where the W bosons or the top quarks produced in the decay chain are off-shell. No significant excess over the Standard Model prediction is observed. The null results are used to set exclusion limits at 95% confidence level in several supersymmetry benchmark models. For pair-produced top-squarks decaying into top quarks, top-squark masses up to 940 GeV are excluded. Stringent exclusion limits are also derived for all other considered top-squark decay scenarios. For the spin-0 mediator models, upper limits are set on the visible cross-section.
$\textbf{Distribution 1 } -$ Kinematic distribution of $m_{\rm top}^{\rm reclustered}$ in tN_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 1 } -$ Kinematic distribution of $m_{\rm top}^{\rm reclustered}$ in tN_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 1 } -$ Kinematic distribution of $m_{\rm top}^{\rm reclustered}$ in tN_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 1 } -$ Kinematic distribution of $m_{\rm top}^{\rm reclustered}$ in tN_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 2 } -$ Kinematic distribution of amT2 in bC2x_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 2 } -$ Kinematic distribution of amT2 in bC2x_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 2 } -$ Kinematic distribution of amT2 in bC2x_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 2 } -$ Kinematic distribution of amT2 in bC2x_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 3 } -$ Kinematic distribution of mT in bC2x_diag. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 3 } -$ Kinematic distribution of mT in bC2x_diag. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 3 } -$ Kinematic distribution of mT in bC2x_diag. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 3 } -$ Kinematic distribution of mT in bC2x_diag. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 4 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in bCbv. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 4 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in bCbv. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 4 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in bCbv. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 4 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in bCbv. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 5 } -$ Kinematic distribution of mT in DM_low. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 5 } -$ Kinematic distribution of mT in DM_low. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 5 } -$ Kinematic distribution of mT in DM_low. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 5 } -$ Kinematic distribution of mT in DM_low. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 6 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in DM_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 6 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in DM_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 6 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in DM_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 6 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in DM_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 7 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_low region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 7 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_low region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 7 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_low region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 7 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_low region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 8 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_med region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 8 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_med region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 8 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_med region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 8 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_med region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 9 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_high region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 9 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_high region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 9 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_high region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 9 } -$ Distributions of BDT score for the tN_diag_high region. The SM background predictions are obtained using the background-only fit configuration.
$\textbf{Distribution 10 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in tN_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 10 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in tN_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 10 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in tN_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 10 } -$ Kinematic distribution of ETmiss in tN_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 11 } -$ Kinematic distribution of amT2 in bWN. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 11 } -$ Kinematic distribution of amT2 in bWN. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 11 } -$ Kinematic distribution of amT2 in bWN. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 11 } -$ Kinematic distribution of amT2 in bWN. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 12 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bffN. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 12 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bffN. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 12 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bffN. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 12 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bffN. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 13 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_diag. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 13 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_diag. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 13 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_diag. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 13 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_diag. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 14 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 14 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 14 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 14 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_med. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 15 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 15 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 15 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Distribution 15 } -$ Kinematic distribution of pT(l)/ETmiss in bCsoft_high. The full event selection in the corresponding signal region is applied, except for the requirement that is imposed on the variable being plotted. The predicted SM backgrounds are scaled with the normalisation factors obtained from the corresponding control regions. The last bin contains overflows.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 1 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 1 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 1 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 1 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 1 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 1 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 1 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 1 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Selected SR 1 } -$ Selected signal regions for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{Selected SR 1 } -$ Selected signal regions for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{Selected SR 1 } -$ Selected signal regions for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{Selected SR 1 } -$ Selected signal regions for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 2 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 2 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 2 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 2 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 2 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 2 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 2 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 2 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop pair production assuming either stop -> t N1, stop -> b W C1 or stop -> b f f' N1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%.
$\textbf{Selected SR 2 } -$ Selected signal regions for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{Selected SR 2 } -$ Selected signal regions for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{Selected SR 2 } -$ Selected signal regions for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{Selected SR 2 } -$ Selected signal regions for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) versus m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Selected SR 3 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Selected SR 3 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Selected SR 3 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Selected SR 3 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 4 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 4 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 4 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 4 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 4 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 4 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 4 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 4 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Selected SR 4 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Selected SR 4 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Selected SR 4 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Selected SR 4 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu > 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 5 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production assuming b C1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%. The chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, m(C1) = m(STOP) - 10 GeV.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 5 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production assuming b C1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%. The chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, m(C1) = m(STOP) - 10 GeV.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 5 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production assuming b C1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%. The chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, m(C1) = m(STOP) - 10 GeV.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 5 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production assuming b C1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%. The chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, m(C1) = m(STOP) - 10 GeV.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 5 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production assuming b C1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%. The chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, m(C1) = m(STOP) - 10 GeV.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 5 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production assuming b C1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%. The chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, m(C1) = m(STOP) - 10 GeV.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 5 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production assuming b C1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%. The chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, m(C1) = m(STOP) - 10 GeV.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 5 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production assuming b C1 decay with a branching ratio of 100%. The chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, m(C1) = m(STOP) - 10 GeV.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 6 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 6 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 6 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 6 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 6 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 6 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 6 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 6 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 6 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 6 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 6 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 6 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 7 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 7 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 7 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 7 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 7 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 7 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 7 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 7 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 7 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 7 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 7 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 7 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 8 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 8 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 8 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 8 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 8 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 8 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 8 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 8 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 8 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 8 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 8 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 8 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 9 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 9 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 9 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 9 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 9 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 9 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 9 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 9 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 10 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 10 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 10 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 10 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 10 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 10 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 10 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 10 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 10 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 10 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 10 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 10 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly left-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 11 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 11 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 11 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 11 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 11 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 11 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 11 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 11 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 11 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 11 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 11 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 11 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for a mostly right-handed stop. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 12 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 12 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 12 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 12 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 12 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 12 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 12 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 12 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 12 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 12 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 12 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Selected SR 12 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model for large $\tan\beta$. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 13 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 13 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 13 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 13 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 13 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 13 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 13 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 13 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Selected SR 13 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Selected SR 13 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Selected SR 13 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Selected SR 13 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} < m_{t_{R}}$ hypothesis. Both stop/sbottom pair productions are considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 14 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 14 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 14 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 14 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 14 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.<br><b>Note:</b> As no observed exclusion is found for this model, the contour is empty.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 14 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.<br><b>Note:</b> As no observed exclusion is found for this model, the contour is empty.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 14 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.<br><b>Note:</b> As no observed exclusion is found for this model, the contour is empty.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 14 (obs.) } -$ Observed 95% excluded regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.<br><b>Note:</b> As no observed exclusion is found for this model, the contour is empty.
$\textbf{Selected SR 14 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.
$\textbf{Selected SR 14 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.
$\textbf{Selected SR 14 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.
$\textbf{Selected SR 14 } -$ Selected signal regions in the plane of mm(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) or the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the well-tempered neutralino model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, b1 -> t C1, b1 -> b N1, and b1 -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratio for each signal point for the $m_{q_{3L}} > m_{t_{R}}$. Only stop pair production is considered.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 1 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a scalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the mediator mass for a fixed mass of the DM candidate of 1 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 1 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a scalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the mediator mass for a fixed mass of the DM candidate of 1 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 1 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a scalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the mediator mass for a fixed mass of the DM candidate of 1 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 1 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a scalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the mediator mass for a fixed mass of the DM candidate of 1 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 2 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a pseudoscalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the mediator mass for a fixed mass of the DM candidate of 1 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 2 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a pseudoscalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the mediator mass for a fixed mass of the DM candidate of 1 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 2 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a pseudoscalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the mediator mass for a fixed mass of the DM candidate of 1 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 2 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a pseudoscalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the mediator mass for a fixed mass of the DM candidate of 1 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 3 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a scalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the DM candidate mass for a fixed mediator mass of 10 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 3 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a scalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the DM candidate mass for a fixed mediator mass of 10 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 3 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a scalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the DM candidate mass for a fixed mediator mass of 10 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 3 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis of a scalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the DM candidate mass for a fixed mediator mass of 10 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 4 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis a pseudoscalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the DM candidate mass for a fixed mediator mass of 10 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 4 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis a pseudoscalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the DM candidate mass for a fixed mediator mass of 10 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 4 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis a pseudoscalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the DM candidate mass for a fixed mediator mass of 10 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{DM Upper Limit 4 } -$ Upper limit on the ratio of the DM production cross-section to the simplified model expectation under the hypothesis a pseudoscalar mediator. The limit is shown as a function of the DM candidate mass for a fixed mediator mass of 10 GeV. The coupling of the mediator to SM and DM particles is assumed to be g=1.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 1 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 1 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 1 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 1 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 2 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 2 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 2 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 2 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the bino LSP model in the m(STOP) vs m(STOP)-m(NEUTRALINO) plane.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 3 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the wino NLSP model with mu < 0
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 3 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the wino NLSP model with mu < 0
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 3 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the wino NLSP model with mu < 0
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 3 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the wino NLSP model with mu < 0
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 4 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the wino NLSP model with mu > 0
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 4 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the wino NLSP model with mu > 0
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 4 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the wino NLSP model with mu > 0
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 4 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the wino NLSP model with mu > 0
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 5 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 5 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 5 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 5 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 6 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 6 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 6 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 6 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 7 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with large tan beta.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 7 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with large tan beta.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 7 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with large tan beta.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 7 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the higgsino LSP model with large tan beta.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 8 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 8 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 8 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 8 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 9 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 9 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 9 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 9 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 10 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with large tan beta.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 10 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with large tan beta.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 10 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with large tan beta.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 10 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the variable m(CHARGINO) - m(NEUTRALINO) higgsino LSP model with large tan beta.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 11 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the simplified model with m(STOP) - m(CHARGINO) = 10 GeV.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 11 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the simplified model with m(STOP) - m(CHARGINO) = 10 GeV.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 11 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the simplified model with m(STOP) - m(CHARGINO) = 10 GeV.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 11 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the simplified model with m(STOP) - m(CHARGINO) = 10 GeV.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 12 } -$ Observed 95% upper cross-section limit in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 12 } -$ Observed 95% upper cross-section limit in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 12 } -$ Observed 95% upper cross-section limit in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 12 } -$ Observed 95% upper cross-section limit in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for direct stop pair production in the higgsino LSP model where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2) are considered with different branching ratios depending on the hypothesis being considered. In this model, dm(C1,N1) =5 GeV and dm(N2,N1)=10 GeV are assumed.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 13 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the well-tempered neutralino model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 13 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the well-tempered neutralino model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 13 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the well-tempered neutralino model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 13 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the well-tempered neutralino model with left-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 14 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the well-tempered neutralino model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 14 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the well-tempered neutralino model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 14 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the well-tempered neutralino model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{X-section U.L. 14 } -$ Observed upper limit on the signal cross section for the well-tempered neutralino model with right-handed stop squarks.
$\textbf{Cutflow 1 } -$ Cutflow for tN_med for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (600, 300) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 1 } -$ Cutflow for tN_med for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (600, 300) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 1 } -$ Cutflow for tN_med for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (600, 300) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 1 } -$ Cutflow for tN_med for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (600, 300) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 2 } -$ Cutflow for tN_high for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (1000, 1) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 2 } -$ Cutflow for tN_high for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (1000, 1) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 2 } -$ Cutflow for tN_high for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (1000, 1) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 2 } -$ Cutflow for tN_high for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (1000, 1) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 3 } -$ Cutflow for bWN for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (350, 230) GeV in bWN. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 3 } -$ Cutflow for bWN for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (350, 230) GeV in bWN. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 3 } -$ Cutflow for bWN for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (350, 230) GeV in bWN. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 3 } -$ Cutflow for bWN for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (350, 230) GeV in bWN. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 4 } -$ Cutflow for bffN for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (350, 300) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 4 } -$ Cutflow for bffN for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (350, 300) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 4 } -$ Cutflow for bffN for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (350, 300) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 4 } -$ Cutflow for bffN for the pure bino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (350, 300) GeV. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 5 } -$ Cutflow for bC2x_diag for the wino NLSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (737, 500, 250) GeV. Only stop pair production is considered in the cutflow. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 5 } -$ Cutflow for bC2x_diag for the wino NLSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (737, 500, 250) GeV. Only stop pair production is considered in the cutflow. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 5 } -$ Cutflow for bC2x_diag for the wino NLSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (737, 500, 250) GeV. Only stop pair production is considered in the cutflow. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 5 } -$ Cutflow for bC2x_diag for the wino NLSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (737, 500, 250) GeV. Only stop pair production is considered in the cutflow. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 6 } -$ Cutflow for bC2x_med for the wino NLSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (842, 300, 150) GeV. Only stop pair production is considered in the cutflow. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 6 } -$ Cutflow for bC2x_med for the wino NLSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (842, 300, 150) GeV. Only stop pair production is considered in the cutflow. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 6 } -$ Cutflow for bC2x_med for the wino NLSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (842, 300, 150) GeV. Only stop pair production is considered in the cutflow. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 6 } -$ Cutflow for bC2x_med for the wino NLSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (842, 300, 150) GeV. Only stop pair production is considered in the cutflow. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 7 } -$ Cutflow for the simplified signal model with $\Delta m( \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = 10 GeV, considering $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (700, 690, 1). The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 7 } -$ Cutflow for the simplified signal model with $\Delta m( \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = 10 GeV, considering $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (700, 690, 1). The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 7 } -$ Cutflow for the simplified signal model with $\Delta m( \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = 10 GeV, considering $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (700, 690, 1). The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 7 } -$ Cutflow for the simplified signal model with $\Delta m( \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = 10 GeV, considering $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (700, 690, 1). The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 8 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_diag for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (400, 355, 350) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 8 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_diag for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (400, 355, 350) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 8 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_diag for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (400, 355, 350) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 8 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_diag for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (400, 355, 350) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 9 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_med for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (600, 205, 200) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 9 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_med for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (600, 205, 200) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 9 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_med for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (600, 205, 200) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 9 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_med for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (600, 205, 200) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 10 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_high for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (800, 155, 150) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 10 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_high for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (800, 155, 150) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 10 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_high for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (800, 155, 150) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 10 } -$ Cutflow for bCsoft_high for the higgsino LSP signal model with $m(\tilde{t}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} , \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} )$ = (800, 155, 150) GeV, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1} \sim \tilde{t}_{\mathrm{L}}$ and large $\tan\beta$. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV. Numbers are provided for the discovery SR, even if a shape fit is used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Cutflow 11 } -$ Cutflow for DM_high for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (300, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 11 } -$ Cutflow for DM_high for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (300, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 11 } -$ Cutflow for DM_high for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (300, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 11 } -$ Cutflow for DM_high for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (300, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 12 } -$ Cutflow for DM_low for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (20, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 12 } -$ Cutflow for DM_low for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (20, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 12 } -$ Cutflow for DM_low for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (20, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 12 } -$ Cutflow for DM_low for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (20, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 13 } -$ Cutflow for DM_low_loose for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (20, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 13 } -$ Cutflow for DM_low_loose for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (20, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 13 } -$ Cutflow for DM_low_loose for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (20, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Cutflow 13 } -$ Cutflow for DM_low_loose for the spin-0 mediator model with $m(\phi, \chi)$ = (20, 1) GeV, assuming g=1 and a scalar mediator. The DxAOD skimming step requires at least one of the following criteria to be fullfilled: one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ triggers has fired and there is at least one loose muon (electron) with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 3.5 (4.5) GeV; or one of the $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ or lepton triggers has fired and there is at least one loose lepton with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ > 25 GeV.
$\textbf{Acceptance 1 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 1 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 1 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 1 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 1 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 1 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 1 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 1 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 2 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_{1},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 2 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_{1},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 2 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_{1},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 2 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_{1},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 2 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_{1},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 2 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_{1},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 2 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_{1},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 2 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the bino LSP model in the $m_{\tilde{t}_{1}}$ vs $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_{1},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane. Efficiencies larger than 100% are observed in the bWN SR due differences in $am_{\mathrm{T2}}$ between truth and reconstruction level, in the absence of $b$-tagging inefficiencies. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 3 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the wino NLSP model with $\mu > 0$.
$\textbf{Acceptance 3 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the wino NLSP model with $\mu > 0$.
$\textbf{Acceptance 3 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the wino NLSP model with $\mu > 0$.
$\textbf{Acceptance 3 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the wino NLSP model with $\mu > 0$.
$\textbf{Efficiency 3 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the wino NLSP model with $\mu > 0$.
$\textbf{Efficiency 3 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the wino NLSP model with $\mu > 0$.
$\textbf{Efficiency 3 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the wino NLSP model with $\mu > 0$.
$\textbf{Efficiency 3 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the wino NLSP model with $\mu > 0$.
$\textbf{Acceptance 4 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV. The model assumes large $\tan\beta$ and the $\tilde{t}_{1}$ to be mostly $\tilde{t}_{L}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 4 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV. The model assumes large $\tan\beta$ and the $\tilde{t}_{1}$ to be mostly $\tilde{t}_{L}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 4 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV. The model assumes large $\tan\beta$ and the $\tilde{t}_{1}$ to be mostly $\tilde{t}_{L}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 4 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV. The model assumes large $\tan\beta$ and the $\tilde{t}_{1}$ to be mostly $\tilde{t}_{L}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 4 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV. The model assumes large $\tan\beta$ and the $\tilde{t}_{1}$ to be mostly $\tilde{t}_{L}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 4 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV. The model assumes large $\tan\beta$ and the $\tilde{t}_{1}$ to be mostly $\tilde{t}_{L}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 4 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV. The model assumes large $\tan\beta$ and the $\tilde{t}_{1}$ to be mostly $\tilde{t}_{L}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 4 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV. The model assumes large $\tan\beta$ and the $\tilde{t}_{1}$ to be mostly $\tilde{t}_{L}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 5 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV, in the region where $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) < m_{\textrm{top}}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 5 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV, in the region where $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) < m_{\textrm{top}}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 5 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV, in the region where $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) < m_{\textrm{top}}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 5 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV, in the region where $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) < m_{\textrm{top}}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 5 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV, in the region where $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) < m_{\textrm{top}}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 5 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV, in the region where $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) < m_{\textrm{top}}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 5 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV, in the region where $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) < m_{\textrm{top}}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 5 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the higgsino LSP model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 5$ GeV, in the region where $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) < m_{\textrm{top}}$. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 6 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the simplified model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}) = 10$ GeV.
$\textbf{Acceptance 6 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the simplified model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}) = 10$ GeV.
$\textbf{Acceptance 6 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the simplified model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}) = 10$ GeV.
$\textbf{Acceptance 6 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the simplified model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}) = 10$ GeV.
$\textbf{Efficiency 6 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the simplified model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}) = 10$ GeV.
$\textbf{Efficiency 6 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the simplified model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}) = 10$ GeV.
$\textbf{Efficiency 6 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the simplified model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}) = 10$ GeV.
$\textbf{Efficiency 6 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the simplified model with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}) = 10$ GeV.
$\textbf{Acceptance 7 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the spin-0 mediator model, assuming a scalar mediator. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 7 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the spin-0 mediator model, assuming a scalar mediator. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 7 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the spin-0 mediator model, assuming a scalar mediator. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Acceptance 7 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the spin-0 mediator model, assuming a scalar mediator. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 7 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the spin-0 mediator model, assuming a scalar mediator. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 7 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the spin-0 mediator model, assuming a scalar mediator. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 7 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the spin-0 mediator model, assuming a scalar mediator. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
$\textbf{Efficiency 7 } -$ Acceptance and efficiency for the spin-0 mediator model, assuming a scalar mediator. Acceptance and efficiency numbers are provided for discovery SRs even if shape fits are used for placing exclusion limits.
Jet substructure observables have significantly extended the search program for physics beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider. The state-of-the-art tools have been motivated by theoretical calculations, but there has never been a direct comparison between data and calculations of jet substructure observables that are accurate beyond leading-logarithm approximation. Such observables are significant not only for probing the collinear regime of QCD that is largely unexplored at a hadron collider, but also for improving the understanding of jet substructure properties that are used in many studies at the Large Hadron Collider. This Letter documents a measurement of the first jet substructure quantity at a hadron collider to be calculated at next-to-next-to-leading-logarithm accuracy. The normalized, differential cross-section is measured as a function of log$_{10}\rho^2$, where $\rho$ is the ratio of the soft-drop mass to the ungroomed jet transverse momentum. This quantity is measured in dijet events from 32.9 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV proton-proton collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector. The data are unfolded to correct for detector effects and compared to precise QCD calculations and leading-logarithm particle-level Monte Carlo simulations.
Data from Fig 3a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 3a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 3b. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 3b. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 3c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. The uncertainties are applied symmetrically, though the cross section cannot go below zero in the first bin.
Data from Fig 3c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. The uncertainties are applied symmetrically, though the cross section cannot go below zero in the first bin.
Data from Fig 4 and Fig 8a-16a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for beta = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 4 and FigAux 8a-16a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for beta = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 4 and Fig 8b-16b. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 4 and FigAux 8b-16b. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 8c-16c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 8c-16c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 6a. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 0. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 6a. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 0. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 6b. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 1. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 6b. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 1. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 6c. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 2. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 6c. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 2. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 7a. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 0, inclusive in $p_T$.
Data from FigAux 7a. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 0, inclusive in $p_T$.
Data from Fig 7b. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 1, inclusive in $p_T$.
Data from FigAux 7b. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 1, inclusive in $p_T$.
Data from Fig 7c. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 2, inclusive in $p_T$.
Data from FigAux 7c. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 2, inclusive in $p_T$.
Results of a search for new phenomena in final states with an energetic jet and large missing transverse momentum are reported. The search uses proton--proton collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$ at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV collected in 2015 and 2016 with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Events are required to have at least one jet with a transverse momentum above 250 GeV and no leptons ($e$ or $\mu$). Several signal regions are considered with increasing requirements on the missing transverse momentum above 250 GeV. Good agreement is observed between the number of events in data and Standard Model predictions. The results are translated into exclusion limits in models with pair-produced weakly interacting dark-matter candidates, large extra spatial dimensions, and supersymmetric particles in several compressed scenarios.
The measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the W($\rightarrow \mu \nu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
The measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the W($\rightarrow e \nu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
The measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the W($\rightarrow e \nu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
The measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the Z/$\gamma ^{*}$($\rightarrow \mu \mu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
The measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the Z/$\gamma ^{*}$($\rightarrow \mu \mu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
The measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the top control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
The measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the top control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
Measured distribution of the $E_{T}^{miss}$ for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV selection compared to the SM predictions. The latter are normalized with normalization factors as determined by the global fit that considers exclusive $E_{T}^{miss}$ regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_{T}$ for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV selection compared to the SM predictions. The latter are normalized with normalization factors as determined by the global fit that considers exclusive $E_{T}^{miss}$ regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
Measured distribution of the leading jet $|\eta|$ for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV selection compared to the SM predictions. The latter are normalized with normalization factors as determined by the global fit that considers exclusive $E_{T}^{miss}$ regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV selection compared to the SM predictions. The latter are normalized with normalization factors as determined by the global fit that considers exclusive $E_{T}^{miss}$ regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
The expected $95\%$ CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$ as a function of the assumed mediator mass m$_{Z_{A}}$ and the dark matter mass m$_{\chi}$.
The measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the W($\rightarrow \mu \nu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.
The observed $95\%$ CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$ as a function of the assumed mediator mass m$_{Z_{A}}$ and the dark matter mass m$_{\chi}$.
The observed $90\%$ CL exclusion limit on the spin-dependent WIMP–proton scattering cross section in the context of the simplified model with axial-vector couplings, assuming minimal mediator width and the coupling values $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$.
The expected $95\%$ CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving a vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$ as a function of the assumed mediator mass m$_{Z_{V}}$ and the dark matter mass m$_{\chi}$.
The observed $95\%$ CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving a vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$ as a function of the assumed mediator mass m$_{Z_{V}}$ and the dark matter mass m$_{\chi}$.
The expected and observed $95\%$ CL limits on the signal strength $\mu = \sigma^{95\% CL}/\sigma$ as a function of the mediator mass for a very light WIMP, in a model with spin-0 pseudoscalar mediator and $g_{q}=g_{\chi}=1.0$.
The expected and observed $95\%$ CL limits on the signal strength $\mu = \sigma^{95\% CL}/\sigma$ as a function of the WIMP mass for $m_{Z_{P}}=10$ GeV, in a model with spin-0 pseudoscalar mediator and $g_{q}=g_{\chi}=1.0$.
The expected exclusion contour at $95\%$ CL in the m$_{\eta}$–m$_{\chi}$ parameter plane for the coloured scalar mediator model, with minimal width and coupling set to $g=1$.
The observed exclusion contour at $95\%$ CL in the m$_{\eta}$–m$_{\chi}$ parameter plane for the coloured scalar mediator model, with minimal width and coupling set to $g=1$.
The expected excluded region at the $95\%$ CL in the ($\tilde{t}_{1}$,$\chi^{0}_{1}$) mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow c + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).
The observed excluded region at the $95\%$ CL in the ($\tilde{t}_{1}$,$\chi^{0}_{1}$) mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow c + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).
The expected excluded region at the $95\%$ CL in the ($\tilde{t}_{1}$,$\chi^{0}_{1}$) mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow b + ff' + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).
The observed excluded region at the $95\%$ CL in the ($\tilde{t}_{1}$,$\chi^{0}_{1}$) mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow b + ff' + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).
The expected exclusion plane at $95\%$ CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_{1} \rightarrow b + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).
The observed exclusion plane at $95\%$ CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_{1} \rightarrow b + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).
The expected exclusion region at $95\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark-neutralino mass difference for $\tilde{q}_{1} → q + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (q =u,d,c,s).
The observed exclusion region at $95\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark-neutralino mass difference for $\tilde{q}_{1} → q + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (q =u,d,c,s).
Expected and observed $95\%$ CL lower limits on the fundamental Planck scale in 4+n dimensions, M$_D$, as a function of the number of extra dimensions.
Expected and observed $95\%$ CL upper limit on the signal strength $\mu$ in the hypothesis of an axial-vector mediator, g$_{q}=0.25$, g$_{\chi}=1.0$ and minimal mediator width, as a function of the assumed mediator and DM masses.
Observed $90\%$ CL exclusion limit on the spin-dependent WIMP–neutron scattering cross section in the context of the simplified model with axial-vector couplings, assuming minimal mediator width and the coupling values $g_{q}=0.25$ and $g_{\chi}=1$.
Expected and observed $95\%$ CL upper limit on the signal strength $\mu$ in the hypothesis of a pseudoscalar mediator, $g_{q}=g_{\chi}=1.0$ and minimal mediator width, as a function of the assumed mediator and DM masses.
This paper presents a measurement of the $W$ boson production cross section and the $W^{+}/W^{-}$ cross-section ratio, both in association with jets, in proton--proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV with the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. The measurement is performed in final states containing one electron and missing transverse momentum using data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 20.2 fb$^{-1}$. Differential cross sections for events with one or two jets are presented for a range of observables, including jet transverse momenta and rapidities, the scalar sum of transverse momenta of the visible particles and the missing transverse momentum in the event, and the transverse momentum of the $W$ boson. For a subset of the observables, the differential cross sections of positively and negatively charged $W$ bosons are measured separately. In the cross-section ratio of $W^{+}/W^{-}$ the dominant systematic uncertainties cancel out, improving the measurement precision by up to a factor of nine. The observables and ratios selected for this paper provide valuable input for the up quark, down quark, and gluon parton distribution functions of the proton.
Cross section for the production of W bosons for different inclusive jet multiplicities.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the cross section for the production of W bosons for different inclusive jet multiplicities.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the inclusive jet multiplicity.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the inclusive jet multiplicity.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the inclusive jet multiplicity.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of second leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of second leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of second leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of second leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of Δ R<sub>jet1,jet2</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of Δ R<sub>jet1,jet2</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of dijet invariant mass for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of dijet invariant mass for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of exclusive jet multiplicity.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of exclusive jet multiplicity.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 0.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 0.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 0.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 0.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 0.
Differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons, W<sup>-</sup> bosons and the W<sup>+</sup>/W<sup>-</sup> cross section ratio as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Statistical correlation between bins in data for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the electron η for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
List of experimentally considered systematic uncertainties for the W+jets cross section measurement
Non-perturbative corrections for the cross section for the production of W bosons for different inclusive jet multiplicities.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the inclusive jet multiplicity.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of second leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of second leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of Δ R<sub>jet1,jet2</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of dijet invariant mass for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of exclusive jet multiplicity.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross section for the production of W bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
Non-perturbative corrections for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 2.
NNLO/NLO k-factors determined with NNLO Njetti for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the H<sub> T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1. These numbers were obtained with code described in Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 062002 [arXiv:1504.02131].
NNLO/NLO k-factors determined with NNLO Njetti for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the W p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1. These numbers were obtained with code described in Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 062002 [arXiv:1504.02131].
NNLO/NLO k-factors determined with NNLO Njetti for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet p<sub>T</sub> for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1. These numbers were obtained with code described in Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 062002 [arXiv:1504.02131].
NNLO/NLO k-factors determined with NNLO Njetti for the differential cross sections for the production of W<sup>+</sup> bosons and W<sup>-</sup> bosons as a function of the leading jet rapidity for events with N<sub> jets</sub> ≥ 1. These numbers were obtained with code described in Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 062002 [arXiv:1504.02131].
Inclusive jet and dijet cross-sections are measured in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The measurement uses a dataset with an integrated luminosity of 3.2 fb$^{-1}$ recorded in 2015 with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Jets are identified using the anti-${k_t}$ algorithm with a radius parameter value of $R=0.4$. The inclusive jet cross-sections are measured double-differentially as a function of the jet transverse momentum, covering the range from 100 GeV to 3.5 TeV, and the absolute jet rapidity up to $|y|=3$. The double-differential dijet production cross-sections are presented as a function of the dijet mass, covering the range from 300 GeV to 9 TeV, and the half absolute rapidity separation between the two leading jets within $|y|<3$, $y*$, up to $y*=3$. Next-to-leading-order, and next-to-next-to-leading-order for the inclusive jet measurement, perturbative QCD calculations corrected for non-perturbative and electroweak effects are compared to the measured cross-sections.
rapidity bin 0 < |Y| < 0.5 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 0.5 < |Y| < 1.0 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 1.0 < |Y| < 1.5 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 1.5 < |Y| < 2.0 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 2.0 < |Y| < 2.5 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 2.5 < |Y| < 3.0 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 0 < y* < 0.5 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 0.5 < y* < 1.0 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 1.0 < y* < 1.5 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 1.5 < y* < 2.0 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 2.0 < y* < 2.5 anti-kt R=0.4
rapidity bin 2.5 < y* < 3.0 anti-kt R=0.4
A search for supersymmetry involving the pair production of gluinos decaying via third-generation squarks into the lightest neutralino ($\displaystyle\tilde\chi^0_1$) is reported. It uses LHC proton--proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ collected with the ATLAS detector in 2015 and 2016. The search is performed in events containing large missing transverse momentum and several energetic jets, at least three of which must be identified as originating from $b$-quarks. To increase the sensitivity, the sample is divided into subsamples based on the presence or absence of electrons or muons. No excess is found above the predicted background. For $\displaystyle\tilde\chi^0_1$ masses below approximately 300 GeV, gluino masses of less than 1.97 (1.92) TeV are excluded at 95% confidence level in simplified models involving the pair production of gluinos that decay via top (bottom) squarks. An interpretation of the limits in terms of the branching ratios of the gluinos into third-generation squarks is also provided. These results improve upon the exclusion limits obtained with the 3.2 fb$^{-1}$ of data collected in 2015.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.8 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.8 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.8 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.8 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.8 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.8 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.8 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.8 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 2.0 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 2.0 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 2.0 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 2.0 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 2.0 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 2.0 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 2.0 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 2.0 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 600 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 600 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 600 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 600 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 600 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 600 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 600 GeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 600 GeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 TeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 TeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 TeV.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 TeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 TeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 TeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 TeV.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gluino mass = 1.9 TeV, Neutralino mass = 1 TeV.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-Gbb-VC.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-Gbb-VC.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-Gbb-VC.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-Gbb-VC.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-1L-II.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-1L-II.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-1L-II.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-1L-II.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-0L-HI.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-0L-HI.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-0L-HI.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-0L-HI.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-0L-HH.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-0L-HH.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-0L-HH.
Distribution of ETMISS for SR-0L-HH.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Acceptances for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Acceptances for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Experimental efficiencies for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Experimental efficiencies for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gbb model in SR-Gbb-VC.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0l-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-B.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-M.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1l-C.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-B selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-B selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-B selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-B selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-M selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-M selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-M selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-M selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-C selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-C selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-C selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-C selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-VC selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-VC selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-VC selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gbb-0L-VC selection for a Gbb signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1400) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-B selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-B selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-B selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-B selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-M selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-M selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-M selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-M selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-C selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-C selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-C selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-1L-C selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-B selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-B selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-B selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-B selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-M selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-M selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-M selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-M selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-C selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-C selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-C selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
Expected number of signal events after each step of the Gtt-0L-C selection for a Gtt signal point (MGLUON,MNEUTRALINO) = (1900,1) GeV.
A search for weakly interacting massive particle dark matter produced in association with bottom or top quarks is presented. Final states containing third-generation quarks and missing transverse momentum are considered. The analysis uses 36.1 $fb^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data recorded by the ATLAS experiment at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016. No significant excess of events above the estimated backgrounds is observed. The results are interpreted in the framework of simplified models of spin-0 dark-matter mediators. For colour-neutral spin-0 mediators produced in association with top quarks and decaying into a pair of dark-matter particles, mediator masses below 50 GeV are excluded assuming a dark-matter candidate mass of 1 GeV and unitary couplings. For scalar and pseudoscalar mediators produced in association with bottom quarks, the search sets limits on the production cross-section of 300 times the predicted rate for mediators with masses between 10 and 50 GeV and assuming a dark-matter mass of 1 GeV and unitary coupling. Constraints on colour-charged scalar simplified models are also presented. Assuming a dark-matter particle mass of 35 GeV, mediator particles with mass below 1.1 TeV are excluded for couplings yielding a dark-matter relic density consistent with measurements.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Systematic uncertainties:</b> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table2">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Fit results:</b> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table3">SRb1 and SRb2</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table4">SRt1, SRt2 and SRt3</a><br/><br/> <b>Upper limits:</b> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table5">table</a><br/><br/> <b>SR distributions:</b> <ul> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table6">SRb1: $E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table7">SRb2: $\cos{\theta}^*_{bb}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table8">SRt1: $m_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{b,min}}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table9">SRt2: $E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss,sig}}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table10">SRt3: $\xi^{+}_{\ell\ell}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table34">SRb1: jet $p_{T}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table35">SRb2: $H_{\mathrm T}^{ratio}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table36">SRt1: $\Delta R_{bb}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table37">SRt2: $M_{\mathrm T}^{b,min}$</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table38">SRt3: $\Delta \phi_{boost}$</a> </ul> <b>Exclusion limits:</b> <ul> <li>Scalar SRb2 <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table11">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table12">observed</a> <li>Scalar SRt1/SRt2 <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table13">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table14">observed</a> <li>Scalar SRt3 <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table15">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table16">observed</a> <li>Pseudo-scalar SRb2 <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table17">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table18">observed</a> <li>Pseudo-scalar SRt1/SRt2 <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table19">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table20">observed</a> <li>Pseudo-scalar SRt3 <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table21">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table22">observed</a> <li>Scalar, SRt1/SRt2 vs DM mass <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table23">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table24">observed</a> <li>Scalar, SRt3 vs DM mass <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table25">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table26">observed</a> <li>Pseudo-scalar, SRt1/SRt2 vs DM mass <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table27">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table28">observed</a> <li>Pseudo-scalar, SRt3 vs DM mass <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table29">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table30">observed</a> <li>Colour-charged scalar mediators ($b-$FDM) <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table32">expected</a> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table33">observed</a> </ul> <b>Direct detection plot:</b> <a href="80080?version=1&table=Table31">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Acceptances:</b> <ul> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table39">SRb1</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table41">SRb2 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table44">SRb2 pseudo-scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table45">SRt2 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table46">SRt1 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table49">SRt2 pseudo-scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table50">SRt1 pseudo-scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table53">SRt3 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table55">SRt3 pseudo-scalar</a> </ul> <b>Efficiencies:</b> <ul> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table40">SRb1</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table42">SRb2 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table43">SRb2 pseudo-scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table47">SRt2 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table48">SRt1 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table51">SRt2 pseudo-scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table52">SRt1 pseudo-scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table54">SRt3 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table56">SRt3 pseudo-scalar</a> </ul> <b>Cutflows:</b> <ul> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table57">SRb1</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table58">SRb2</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table59">SRt1 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table60">SRt2 scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table61">SRt1 pseudo-scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table62">SRt2 pseudo-scalar</a> <li><a href="80080?version=1&table=Table63">SRt3</a> </ul> <b>Truth Code snippets</b> are available under "Resources" (purple button on the left)
Summary of the main systematic uncertainties and their impact on the total SM background prediction in each of the signal regions studied. A range is shown for the four bins composing SRb2 . The total systematic uncertainty can be different from the sum in quadrature of individual sources due to the correlations between them resulting from the fit to the data. The quoted theoretical uncertainties include modelling and cross-section uncertainties.
Fit results in SRb1 and SRb2 for an integrated luminosity of $36.1 fb^{-1}$. The background normalisation parameters are obtained from the background-only fit in the CRs and are applied to the SRs. Small backgrounds are indicated as Others. The dominant component of these smaller background sources in SRb1 is di-boson processes. Benchmark signal models yields are given for each SR. The uncertainties on the yields include all systematic uncertainties.
Fit results in SRt1, SRt2 and SRt3 for an integrated luminosity of $36.1 fb^{-1}$. The background normalisation parameters are obtained from the background-only fit in the CRs and are applied to the SRs. Small backgrounds are indicated as Others. Benchmark signal models yields are given for each SR. The uncertainties on the yields include all systematic uncertainties.
95% CL upper limits on the visible cross-section ($\langle\epsilon\mathcal{A}\sigma\rangle^{\rm obs}_{95}$) and on the number of BSM events ($S^{\rm obs}_{95}$ ). The third column ($S^{\rm exp}_{95}$) shows the 95% CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last column indicates the discovery $p$-value ($p(s = 0)$) and Z (the number of equivalent Gaussian standard deviations).
Comparison of the data with the post-fit SM prediction of the $E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution in SRb1. The last bins include overflows, where applicable. All signal region requirements except the one on the distribution shown are applied. The signal region requirement on the distribution shown is indicated by an arrow. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit SM prediction of the $\cos{\theta}^*_{bb}$ distribution in SRb2. The last bins include overflows, where applicable. All signal region requirements except the one on the distribution shown are applied. The signal region requirement on the distribution shown is indicated by an arrow. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit SM prediction of the $m_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{b,min}}$ distribution in SRt1. The last bins include overflows, where applicable. All signal region requirements except the one on the distribution shown are applied. The signal region requirement on the distribution shown is indicated by an arrow. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit SM prediction of the $E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss,sig}}$ distribution in SRt2. The last bins include overflows, where applicable. All signal region requirements except the one on the distribution shown are applied. The signal region requirement on the distribution shown is indicated by an arrow. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit SM prediction of the $\xi^{+}_{\ell\ell}$ distribution in SRt3. The last bins include overflows, where applicable. All signal region requirements except the one on the distribution shown are applied. The signal region requirement on the distribution shown is indicated by an arrow. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in the SRb2 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in SRb2 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in the SRt1/SRt2 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$. To derive the results for the fully hadronic $t\bar{t}$ final state the region among SRt1 and SRt2 providing the best expected sensitivity is used.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in SRt1/SRt2 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$. To derive the results for the fully hadronic $t\bar{t}$ final state the region among SRt1 and SRt2 providing the best expected sensitivity is used.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in SRt3 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in SRt3 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRb2 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRb2 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRt1/SRt2 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$. To derive the results for the fully hadronic $t\bar{t}$ final state the region among SRt1 and SRt2 providing the best expected sensitivity is used.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRt1/SRt2 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$. To derive the results for the fully hadronic $t\bar{t}$ final state the region among SRt1 and SRt2 providing the best expected sensitivity is used.
Expected limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRt3 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRt3 as a function of the mediator mass for a DM mass of 1 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in SRt1/SRt2 as a function of the DM mass for a mediator mass of 10 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$. To derive the results for the fully hadronic $t\bar{t}$ final state the region among SRt1 and SRt2 providing the best expected sensitivity is used.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in SRt1/SRt2 as a function of the DM mass for a mediator mass of 10 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$. To derive the results for the fully hadronic $t\bar{t}$ final state the region among SRt1 and SRt2 providing the best expected sensitivity is used.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in SRt3 as a function of the DM mass for a mediator mass of 10 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral scalar model in SRt3 as a function of the DM mass for a mediator mass of 10 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRt1/SRt2 as a function of the DM mass for a mediator mass of 10 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$. To derive the results for the fully hadronic $t\bar{t}$ final state the region among SRt1 and SRt2 providing the best expected sensitivity is used.
Observed exclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRt1/SRt2 as a function of the DM mass for a mediator mass of 10 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$. To derive the results for the fully hadronic $t\bar{t}$ final state the region among SRt1 and SRt2 providing the best expected sensitivity is used.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRt3 as a function of the DM mass for a mediator mass of 10 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Observed xclusion limits for colour-neutral pseudo-scalar model in SRt3 as a function of the DM mass for a mediator mass of 10 GeV. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L. and are expressed in terms of the ratio of the excluded cross-section over the nominal cross-section for a coupling assumption of $g = g_\chi = g_\nu = 1$.
Comparison of the 90% CL limits on the spin-independent DM–nucleon cross-section versus mediator mass between these results and the direct-detection experiments, in the context of the colour-neutral simplified model with scalar mediator. The black line indicates the exclusion contour derived from the observed limits of SRt3. Values inside the contour are excluded.
Expected exclusion limits for colour-charged scalar mediators ($b$-FDM) as a function of the mediator and DM masses for $36.1fb^{-1}$ of data. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L for a coupling assumption $\lambda_b$ yielding the measured relic density.
Exclusion observed limits for colour-charged scalar mediators ($b-$FDM) as a function of the mediator and DM masses for $36.1fb^{-1}$ of data. The limits are calculated at 95% C.L for a coupling assumption $\lambda_b$ yielding the measured relic density.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit Monte Carlo prediction of sub leading jet $p_{T}$ in SRb1. The last bin includes overflows. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the Monte Carlo prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit Monte Carlo prediction of $H_{\mathrm T}^{ratio}$ distribution in SRb2. The last bin includes overflows. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the Monte Carlo prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit Monte Carlo prediction of $\Delta R_{bb}$ in SRt1. The last bin includes overflows. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the Monte Carlo prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit Monte Carlo prediction of $M_{\mathrm T}^{b,min}$ in SRt2. The last bin includes overflows. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the Monte Carlo prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Comparison of the data with the post-fit Monte Carlo prediction of $\Delta \phi_{boost}$ in SRt3. The last bin includes overflows. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data over the Monte Carlo prediction. The band includes all systematic uncertainties.
Acceptance of the SRb1 selection of the $b$-FDM model signal samples
Efficiency of the SRb1 selection of the $b$-FDM model signal samples
Acceptance of the SRb2 selection of the colour-neutral simplified model samples with scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with bottom-quark pairs.
Efficiency of the SRb2 selection to the colour-neutral simplified model samples with scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with bottom-quark pairs
Efficiency of the SRb2 selection to the colour-neutral simplified model samples with pseudo-scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with bottom-quark pairs
Acceptance of SRb2 selection to the colour-neutral simplified model samples with pseudo-scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with bottom-quark pairs
Acceptance of the SRt2 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Acceptance of the SRt1 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Efficiency of the SRt2 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Efficiency of the SRt1 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Acceptance of the SRt2 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with pseudo-scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Acceptance of the SRt1 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with pseudo-scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Efficiency of the SRt2 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with pseudo-scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Efficiency of the SRt1 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with pseudo-scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Acceptance of the SRt3 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Efficiency of the SRt3 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Acceptance of the SRt3 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with pseudo-scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Efficiency of the SRt3 selections to the color-neutral simplified model samples with pseudo-scalar mediator decaying into dark matter pairs produced in association with top quarks.
Number of signal events selected at different stages of the SRb1 selections for the $b$-FDM benchmark model $m(\phi_b,\chi)=(1000,35)$GeV
Number of signal events selected at different stages of the SRb2 selections for the $b\bar{b} +\phi$ benchmark model $m(\phi,\chi)=(20,1)$GeV, $g=1$.
Number of signal events selected at different stages of the SRt1 selections for the $t \bar{t} +\phi$ benchmark model $m(\phi,\chi)=(20,1)$GeV, $g=1$.
Number of signal events selected at different stages of the SRt2 selections for the $t \bar{t} +\phi$ benchmark model $m(\phi,\chi)=(20,1)$GeV, $g=1$.
Number of signal events selected at different stages of the SRt1 selections for the $t \bar{t} +a$ benchmark model $m(a,\chi)=(20,1)$GeV, $g=1$.
Number of signal events selected at different stages of the SRt2 selections for the $t \bar{t} +a$ benchmark model $m(\phi,\chi)=(20,1)$GeV, $g=1$.
Number of signal events selected at different stages of the SRt3 selections for the $t \bar{t} +\phi$ benchmark model $m(\phi,\chi)=(20,1)$GeV, $g=1$.
A search for doubly charged Higgs bosons with pairs of prompt, isolated, highly energetic leptons with the same electric charge is presented. The search uses a proton-proton collision data sample at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV corresponding to 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity recorded in 2015 and 2016 by the ATLAS detector at the LHC. This analysis focuses on the decays $H^{\pm\pm}\rightarrow e^{\pm}e^{\pm}$, $H^{\pm\pm}\rightarrow e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$ and $H^{\pm\pm}\rightarrow \mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$, fitting the dilepton mass spectra in several exclusive signal regions. No significant evidence of a signal is observed and corresponding limits on the production cross-section are derived at 95% confidence level. The observed lower limit on the mass of a doubly charged Higgs boson only coupling to left-handed leptons ($e$,$\mu$) varies from 770 GeV to 870 GeV (850 GeV expected) for $B(H^{\pm\pm}\rightarrow \ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm})$ = 100% and both the expected and observed mass limits are above 450 GeV for $B(H^{\pm\pm}\rightarrow \ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm})$ = 10% and any combination of partial branching ratios.
Observed and expected upper limit on the cross-section for $pp \to H^{++}H^{--}$ for a combination of partial branching ratios of $B(ee) = 100\%$, $B(e \mu ) = 0\%$, and $B( \mu \mu ) = 0\%$.
Observed and expected upper limit on the cross-section for $pp \to H^{++}H^{--}$ for a combination of partial branching ratios of $B(ee) = 0\%$, $B(e \mu ) = 0\%$, and $B( \mu \mu ) = 100\%$.
Observed and expected upper limit on the cross-section for $pp \to H^{++}H^{--}$ for a combination of partial branching ratios of $B(ee) = 0\%$, $B(e \mu ) = 100\%$, and $B( \mu \mu ) = 0\%$.
Observed and expected upper limit on the cross-section for $pp \to H^{++}H^{--}$ for a combination of partial branching ratios of $B(ee) = 30\%$, $B(e \mu ) = 40\%$, and $B( \mu \mu ) = 30\%$.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass as a function of the branching ratio $B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm}e^{\pm})$ where $B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to X) = 1 - B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm}e^{\pm})$, with "$X$" not entering any of the signal regions.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass as a function of the branching ratio $B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to \mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm})$ where $B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to X) = 1 - B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to \mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm})$, with "$X$" not entering any of the signal regions.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass as a function of the branching ratio $B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm})$ where $B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to X) = 1 - B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm})$, with "$X$" not entering any of the signal regions.
Minimum observed and expected lower limit (among all partial branching ratio combinations) on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass as a function of the branching ratio $B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to \ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm})$ where $B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to X) = 1 - B(H_{L}^{\pm\pm} \to \ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm})$, with "$X$" not entering any of the signal regions.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass as a function of the branching ratio $B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm}e^{\pm})$ where $B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to X) = 1 - B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm}e^{\pm})$, with "$X$" not entering any of the signal regions.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass as a function of the branching ratio $B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to \mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm})$ where $B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to X) = 1 - B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to \mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm})$, with "$X$" not entering any of the signal regions.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass as a function of the branching ratio $B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm})$ where $B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to X) = 1 - B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm})$, with "$X$" not entering any of the signal regions.
Minimum observed and expected lower limit (among all partial branching ratio combinations) on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass as a function of the branching ratio $B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to \ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm})$ where $B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to X) = 1 - B(H_{R}^{\pm\pm} \to \ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm})$, with "$X$" not entering any of the signal regions.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 100%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 100%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 90%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 90%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 80%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 80%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 70%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 70%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 60%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 60%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 50%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 50%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 40%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 40%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 30%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 30%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 20%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 20%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{L}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 10%.
Observed and expected lower limit on the $H_{R}^{\pm\pm}$ boson mass for all branching ratio combinations ($B(ee)$,$B(e\mu)$,$B(\mu\mu)$) that sum to 10%.
This Letter presents the measurement of differential cross sections of isolated prompt photons produced in association with a b-jet or a c-jet. These final states provide sensitivity to the heavy-flavour content of the proton and aspects related to the modelling of heavy-flavour quarks in perturbative QCD. The measurement uses proton-proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeV recorded by the ATLAS detector at the LHC in 2012 corresponding to an integrated luminosity of up to 20.2 fb$^{-1}$. The differential cross sections are measured for each jet flavour with respect to the transverse energy of the leading photon in two photon pseudorapidity regions: $|\eta^\gamma|<1.37$ and $1.56<|\eta^\gamma|<2.37$. The measurement covers photon transverse energies $25 < E_\textrm{T}^\gamma<400$ GeV and $25 < E_\textrm{T}^\gamma<350$ GeV respectively for the two $|\eta^\gamma|$ regions. For each jet flavour, the ratio of the cross sections in the two $|\eta^\gamma|$ regions is also measured. The measurement is corrected for detector effects and compared to leading-order and next-to-leading-order perturbative QCD calculations, based on various treatments and assumptions about the heavy-flavour content of the proton. Overall, the predictions agree well with the measurement, but some deviations are observed at high photon transverse energies. The total uncertainty in the measurement ranges between 13% and 66%, while the central $\gamma+b$ measurement exhibits the smallest uncertainty, ranging from 13% to 27%, which is comparable to the precision of the theoretical predictions.
Measured fiducial integrated $\gamma+b$ and $\gamma+c$ cross sections for $|\eta^\gamma|<1.37$ and $1.56<|\eta^\gamma|<2.37$.
Measured $\gamma+b$ fiducial differential cross section as a function of $E_\text{T}^\gamma$ for $|\eta^\gamma|<1.37$.
Measured $\gamma+b$ fiducial differential cross section as a function of $E_\text{T}^\gamma$ for $1.56<|\eta^\gamma|<2.37$.
Measured $\gamma+c$ fiducial differential cross section as a function of $E_\text{T}^\gamma$ for $|\eta^\gamma|<1.37$.
Measured $\gamma+c$ fiducial differential cross section as a function of $E_\text{T}^\gamma$ for $1.56<|\eta^\gamma|<2.37$.
Measured ratio of the $\gamma+b$ fiducial differential cross section as a function of $E_\text{T}^\gamma$ for $|\eta^\gamma|<1.37$ to that for $1.56<|\eta^\gamma|<2.37$.
Measured ratio of the $\gamma+c$ fiducial differential cross section as a function of $E_\text{T}^\gamma$ for $|\eta^\gamma|<1.37$ to that for $1.56<|\eta^\gamma|<2.37$.
Statistical correlation between the $\gamma+b$ and the $\gamma+c$ cross sections in a given $E_\text{T}^\gamma$ bin and $|\eta^\gamma|$ region. The two cross sections are correlated as the heavy flavour fractions are extracted simultaneously from a template fit, performed in each $E_\text{T}^\gamma$ bin and separately for the two $|\eta^\gamma|$ regions.
Signed shifts of the individual systematic uncertainties on the $\gamma+b$ cross section for $|\eta^\gamma|<1.37$. The numbers after the name of the uncertainty source refer to the individual component in that uncertainty. Each bin of the MC statistical uncertainty is independent of any other bin. The first four components of the photon energy scale uncertainty are specific to this $|\eta^\gamma|$ region and are independent of the components in the other region. The region is indicated as part of their name to indicate the independence between the $|\eta^\gamma|$ regions. The uncertainties on the prompt photon modelling, non-perturbative QCD models and particle-level migration effects are only varied once and not up and down by their nature, but are symmetrised for the final results. Only uncertainties which have at least a 1% variation in at least one bin of the $\gamma+b$ and $\gamma+c$ cross section measurements, including the ratios, are listed. The others are summed in quadrature and listed as a single entry.
Signed shifts of the individual systematic uncertainties on the $\gamma+b$ cross section for $1.56<|\eta^\gamma|<2.37$. The numbers after the name of the uncertainty source refer to the individual component in that uncertainty. Each bin of the MC statistical uncertainty is independent of any other bin. The first four components of the photon energy scale uncertainty are specific to this $|\eta^\gamma|$ region and are independent of the components in the other region. The region is indicated as part of their name to indicate the independence between the $|\eta^\gamma|$ regions. The uncertainties on the prompt photon modelling, non-perturbative QCD models and particle-level migration effects are only varied once and not up and down by their nature, but are symmetrised for the final results. Only uncertainties which have at least a 1% variation in at least one bin of the $\gamma+b$ and $\gamma+c$ cross section measurements, including the ratios, are listed. The others are summed in quadrature and listed as a single entry.
Signed shifts of the individual systematic uncertainties on the $\gamma+c$ cross section for $|\eta^\gamma|<1.37$. The numbers after the name of the uncertainty source refer to the individual component in that uncertainty. Each bin of the MC statistical uncertainty is independent of any other bin. The first four components of the photon energy scale uncertainty are specific to this $|\eta^\gamma|$ region and are independent of the components in the other region. The region is indicated as part of their name to indicate the independence between the $|\eta^\gamma|$ regions. The uncertainties on the prompt photon modelling, non-perturbative QCD models and particle-level migration effects are only varied once and not up and down by their nature, but are symmetrised for the final results. Only uncertainties which have at least a 1% variation in at least one bin of the $\gamma+b$ and $\gamma+c$ cross section measurements, including the ratios, are listed. The others are summed in quadrature and listed as a single entry.
Signed shifts of the individual systematic uncertainties on the $\gamma+c$ cross section for $1.56<|\eta^\gamma|<2.37$. The numbers after the name of the uncertainty source refer to the individual component in that uncertainty. Each bin of the MC statistical uncertainty is independent of any other bin. The first four components of the photon energy scale uncertainty are specific to this $|\eta^\gamma|$ region and are independent of the components in the other region. The region is indicated as part of their name to indicate the independence between the $|\eta^\gamma|$ regions. The uncertainties on the prompt photon modelling, non-perturbative QCD models and particle-level migration effects are only varied once and not up and down by their nature, but are symmetrised for the final results. Only uncertainties which have at least a 1% variation in at least one bin of the $\gamma+b$ and $\gamma+c$ cross section measurements, including the ratios, are listed. The others are summed in quadrature and listed as a single entry.
A search for massive coloured resonances which are pair-produced and decay into two jets is presented. The analysis uses 36.7 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV pp collision data recorded by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC in 2015 and 2016. No significant deviation from the background prediction is observed. Results are interpreted in a SUSY simplified model where the lightest supersymmetric particle is the top squark, $\tilde{t}$, which decays promptly into two quarks through $R$-parity-violating couplings. Top squarks with masses in the range 100 GeV < $m_{\tilde{t}}$ < 410 GeV are excluded at 95% confidence level. If the decay is into a $b$-quark and a light quark, a dedicated selection requiring two $b$-tags is used to exclude masses in the ranges 100 GeV < $m_{\tilde{t}}$ < 470 GeV and 480 GeV < $m_{\tilde{t}}$ < 610 GeV. Additional limits are set on the pair-production of massive colour-octet resonances.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <p><b>Cutflows:</b><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=CutflowTable1">Stop 100GeV</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=CutflowTable2">Stop 500GeV</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=CutflowTable3">Coloron 1500GeV</a><br> </p> <p><b>Event Yields:</b><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=SRdistribution1">Inclusive stop SR</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=SRdistribution2">Inclusive coloron SR </a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=SRdistribution3">b-tagged stop SR</a><br> </p> <p><b>Acceptances and Efficiencies:</b><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Acceptance1">Inclusive stop SR, before mass window</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Acceptance2">Inclusive stop SR, after mass window</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Acceptance3">Inclusive coloron SR, before mass window</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Acceptance4">Inclusive coloron SR, after mass window</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Acceptance5">b-tagged stop SR, before mass window</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Acceptance6">b-tagged stop SR, after mass window</a><br> </p> <p><b>Cross section upper limits:</b><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection1">Inclusive stop SR</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection2">Inclusive coloron SR</a><br> <a href="79059?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection3">b-tagged stop SR</a><br> </p> <p><b>Truth Code</b> and <b>SLHA Files</b> for the cutflows are available under "Resources" (purple button on the left) </p>
Cutflow table for a pair produced top squark of 100 GeV decaying into a b- and an s-quark.
Cutflow table for a pair produced top squark of 500 GeV decaying into a b- and an s-quark.
Cutflow table for a pair produced coloron of 1500 GeV decaying into two quarks.
The observed number of data, background and top squark signal events in each of the signal regions of the inclusive selection
The observed number of data, background and coloron signal events in each of the signal regions of the inclusive selection
The observed number of data, background and top squark signal events in each of the signal regions of the b-tagged selection
Signal acceptance and efficiency (in %) as a function of M(STOP), before mass windows
Signal acceptance (in %) and efficiency as a function of M(STOP), after mass windows
Signal acceptance and efficiency (in %) as a function of M(RHO), before mass windows
Signal acceptance and efficiency (in %) as a function of M(RHO), after mass windows
Signal acceptance (in %) and efficiency as a function of M(STOP), before mass windows
Signal acceptance (in %) and efficiency as a function of M(STOP), after mass windows
Cross section excluded at 95% CL as a function of the top squark mass, for a pair produced top squark with decays into a pair of light-quarks.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL as a function of the cooron mass, for a pair produced coloron with decays into a pair of light-quarks.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL as a function of the top squark mass, for a pair produced top squark with decays into a b- and an s-quark.
A search is conducted for new resonances decaying into a $WW$ or $WZ$ boson pair, where one $W$ boson decays leptonically and the other $W$ or $Z$ boson decays hadronically. It is based on proton-proton collision data with an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016. The search is sensitive to diboson resonance production via vector-boson fusion as well as quark-antiquark annihilation and gluon-gluon fusion mechanisms. No significant excess of events is observed with respect to the Standard Model backgrounds. Several benchmark models are used to interpret the results. Limits on the production cross section are set for a new narrow scalar resonance, a new heavy vector-boson and a spin-2 Kaluza-Klein graviton.
Limit
Limit
Limit
Limit
Limit
Limit
Limit
A search is presented for the direct pair production of the stop, the supersymmetric partner of the top quark, that decays through an $R$-parity-violating coupling to a final state with two leptons and two jets, at least one of which is identified as a $b$-jet. The dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV, collected in 2015 and 2016 by the ATLAS detector at the LHC. No significant excess is observed over the Standard Model background, and exclusion limits are set on stop pair production at a 95% confidence level. Lower limits on the stop mass are set between 600 GeV and 1.5 TeV for branching ratios above 10% for decays to an electron or muon and a $b$-quark.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 800 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1200 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Expected exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR800 signal region.
Observed exclusion limit contour in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the (BRe,BRtau) plane for a 1500 GeV stop, for the SR1100 signal region.
$m_{bl}^{0}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{bl}^{0}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{bl}^{0}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{bl}^\mathrm{asym}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{bl}^\mathrm{asym}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{bl}^\mathrm{asym}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$H_\mathrm{T}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$H_\mathrm{T}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$H_\mathrm{T}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{ll}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{ll}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{ll}$ distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{bl}^{1}$(rej) distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{bl}^{1}$(rej) distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{bl}^{1}$(rej) distribution in SR800. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the background-only fit. The last bin includes overflows.
Full list of event selections and MC generator-weighted yields and efficiencies in the inclusive SR800 and SR1100 signal regions for several signal samples of varying stop mass with decay into b-electron, b-muon or b-tau at 1/3 branching ratio.
Full list of event selections and MC generator-weighted yields and efficiencies in the inclusive SR800 and SR1100 signal regions for several signal samples of varying stop mass with decay into b-electron, b-muon or b-tau at 1/3 branching ratio.
Full list of event selections and MC generator-weighted yields and efficiencies in the inclusive SR800 and SR1100 signal regions for several signal samples of varying stop mass with decay into b-electron, b-muon or b-tau at 1/3 branching ratio.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1550 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1550 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
Observed exclusion limit in the (BRe,BRtau) plane on the cross section for a 1600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1350 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1400 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1450 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1500 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1550 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1550 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 600 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 700 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 800 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 900 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1000 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1050 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1100 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1150 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1200 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1250 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
The chosen signal region in the (BRe,BRtau) plane with the best expected exclusion on the cross section for a 1300 GeV stop. All limits are computed at 95% CL.
This paper presents a measurement of the triple-differential cross section for the Drell--Yan process $Z/\gamma^*\rightarrow \ell^+\ell^-$ where $\ell$ is an electron or a muon. The measurement is performed for invariant masses of the lepton pairs, $m_{\ell\ell}$, between $46$ and $200$ GeV using a sample of $20.2$ fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions data at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV collected by the ATLAS detector at the LHC in 2012. The data are presented in bins of invariant mass, absolute dilepton rapidity, $|y_{\ell\ell}|$, and the angular variable $\cos\theta^{*}$ between the outgoing lepton and the incoming quark in the Collins--Soper frame. The measurements are performed in the range $|y_{\ell\ell}|<2.4$ in the muon channel, and extended to $|y_{\ell\ell}|<3.6$ in the electron channel. The cross sections are used to determine the $Z$ boson forward-backward asymmetry as a function of $|y_{\ell\ell}|$ and $m_{\ell\ell}$. The measurements achieve high-precision, below the percent level in the pole region, excluding the uncertainty in the integrated luminosity, and are in agreement with predictions. These precision data are sensitive to the parton distribution functions and the effective weak mixing angle.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the central rapidity muon channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the central rapidity muon channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the central rapidity muon channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the central rapidity electron channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the central rapidity electron channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the central rapidity electron channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the forward rapidity electron channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the forward rapidity electron channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the measurement in the forward rapidity electron channel. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. Correlated systematic uncertainties with the suffix :A should be treated as additive and with the suffix :M should be treated as multiplicative. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level. 'C Dressed' represents the multiplicative correction factor to translate the cross sections to the dressed level with the cone radius of 0.1: SigmaDressed = C Dressed * SigmaBorn.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement of muon, electron central and electron central-forward channels. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement of muon, electron central and electron central-forward channels. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement of muon, electron central and electron central-forward channels. Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement, integerated in cos theta_CS (differential in y, Mll) Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement, integerated in cos theta_CS (differential in y, Mll) Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement, integerated in cos theta_CS (differential in y, Mll) Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement, integerated in cos theta_CS and y (differential in Mll) Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement, integerated in cos theta_CS and y (differential in Mll) Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Detailed breakdown of systematic uncertainties for the combined measurement, integerated in cos theta_CS and y (differential in Mll) Common systematic uncertainty on the luminosity measurment of 1.8% is not included. The source 'sys,uncor' represents bin-to-bin uncorrelated systematic uncertainty. The cross sections are given at the Born QED level.
Powheg based prediction for AFB in the central-central fiducial phase space, as reported in Fig 16 of the paper. Powheg prediction is corrected to NNLO QCD and NLO EWK, as described in the paper. PDF uncertainties are computed using CT10 PDF set scaled to 68%.
Powheg based prediction for AFB in the central-fiducial fiducial phase space, as reported in Fig 17 of the paper. Powheg prediction is corrected to NNLO QCD and NLO EWK, as described in the paper. PDF uncertainties are computed using CT10 PDF set scaled to 68%.
A search for long-lived, massive particles predicted by many theories beyond the Standard Model is presented. The search targets final states with large missing transverse momentum and at least one high-mass displaced vertex with five or more tracks, and uses 32.8 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV $pp$ collision data collected by the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The observed yield is consistent with the expected background. The results are used to extract 95\% CL exclusion limits on the production of long-lived gluinos with masses up to 2.37 TeV and lifetimes of $\mathcal{O}(10^{-2})$-$\mathcal{O}(10)$ ns in a simplified model inspired by Split Supersymmetry.
Vertex reconstruction efficiency as a function of radial position $R$ with and without the special LRT processing for one $R$-hadron signal sample with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.2$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 100$ GeV and $\tau_{\tilde{g}} = 1$ ns. The efficiency is defined as the probability for a true LLP decay to be matched with a reconstructed DV fulfilling the vertex preselection criteria in events with a reconstructed primary vertex.
Vertex reconstruction efficiency as a function of radial position $R$ for two $R$-hadron signal samples with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.2$ TeV, $\tau_{\tilde{g}} = 1$ ns and different neutralino masses. The efficiency is defined as the probability for a true LLP decay to be matched with a reconstructed DV fulfilling the vertex preselection criteria in events with a reconstructed primary vertex.
Fractions of selected events for several signal MC samples with a gluino lifetime $\tau = 1$ ns, illustrating how $\mathcal{A}\times\varepsilon$ varies with the model parameters.
Fractions of selected events for several signal MC samples with a mass difference $\Delta m = 100$ GeV, illustrating how $\mathcal{A}\times\varepsilon$ varies with the model parameters.
Two-dimensional distribution of $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ and track multiplicity for DVs in data events and events of a $R$-hadron signal sample with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.4$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 100$ GeV and $\tau_{\tilde{g}} = 1$ ns that satisfy all signal region event selection criteria.
Two-dimensional distribution of $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ and track multiplicity for DVs in data events and events of a $R$-hadron signal sample with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.4$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 1.32$ TeV and $\tau_{\tilde{g}} = 1$ ns that satisfy all signal region event selection criteria.
Observed cross section upper 95% CL limits as a function of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $\tau$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}=100$ GeV. For the mass limits see the entry of Figure 8b.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=1.4$ TeV and fixed $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Vertex reconstruction efficiency as a function of radial position $R$ with and without the special LRT processing for one $R$-hadron signal sample with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.2$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 100$ GeV and $\tau_{\tilde{g}} = 1$ ns. The efficiency is defined as the probability for a true LLP decay to be matched with a reconstructed DV fulfilling the vertex preselection criteria in events with a reconstructed primary vertex.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=2.0$ TeV and fixed $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Vertex reconstruction efficiency as a function of radial position $R$ for two $R$-hadron signal samples with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.2$ TeV, $\tau_{\tilde{g}} = 1$ ns and different neutralino masses. The efficiency is defined as the probability for a true LLP decay to be matched with a reconstructed DV fulfilling the vertex preselection criteria in events with a reconstructed primary vertex.
Lower 95% CL limits on $m_{\tilde{g}}$ for fixed $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Fractions of selected events for several signal MC samples with a gluino lifetime $\tau = 1$ ns, illustrating how $\mathcal{A}\times\varepsilon$ varies with the model parameters.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=1.4$ TeV and fixed $\Delta m=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Fractions of selected events for several signal MC samples with a mass difference $\Delta m = 100$ GeV, illustrating how $\mathcal{A}\times\varepsilon$ varies with the model parameters.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=2.0$ TeV and fixed $\Delta m=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Two-dimensional distribution of $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ and track multiplicity for DVs in data events and events of a $R$-hadron signal sample with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.4$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 100$ GeV and $\tau_{\tilde{g}} = 1$ ns that satisfy all signal region event selection criteria.
Lower 95% CL limit on $m_{\tilde{g}}$ for fixed $\Delta m=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Two-dimensional distribution of $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ and track multiplicity for DVs in data events and events of a $R$-hadron signal sample with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.4$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 1.32$ TeV and $\tau_{\tilde{g}} = 1$ ns that satisfy all signal region event selection criteria.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=1.4$ TeV and fixed $\tau=1$ ns as a function of $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=1.4$ TeV and fixed $\Delta m=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=2.0$ TeV and fixed $\tau=1$ ns as a function of $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=2.0$ TeV and fixed $\Delta m=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Observed 95% CL limit as a function of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ for fixed $\tau=1$ ns.
Lower 95% CL limit on $m_{\tilde{g}}$ for fixed $\Delta m=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Two-dimensional distributions of $x$-$y$ positions of vertices observed in the data passing the vertex pre-selection and satisfying all signal region event-level requirements.
Two-dimensional distributions of $x$-$y$ positions of vertices observed in the data passing the vertex pre-selection and satisfying all signal region event-level requirements.
Distribution of the mass $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ for vertices in data events and in events of five $R$-hadron signal samples with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.2$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 100$ GeV and different $\tau_{\tilde{g}}$ that satisfy the signal region event requirements. All DV selections are applied except for the $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ and track multiplicity requirements.
Distribution of the mass $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ for vertices in data events and in events of five $R$-hadron signal samples with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.2$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 100$ GeV and different $\tau_{\tilde{g}}$ that satisfy the signal region event requirements. All DV selections are applied except for the $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ and track multiplicity requirements.
Distribution of the track multiplicity $n_{\mathrm{Tracks}}$ for vertices in data events and events of five $R$-hadron signal samples with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.2$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 100$ GeV and and different $\tau_{\tilde{g}}$ that satisfy the signal region event requirements. All DV selections are applied except for the $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ and track multiplicity requirements. The track multiplicity distribution requires vertices to have $m_{\mathrm{DV}}>3$ GeV.
Distribution of the track multiplicity $n_{\mathrm{Tracks}}$ for vertices in data events and events of five $R$-hadron signal samples with $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1.2$ TeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 100$ GeV and and different $\tau_{\tilde{g}}$ that satisfy the signal region event requirements. All DV selections are applied except for the $m_{\mathrm{DV}}$ and track multiplicity requirements. The track multiplicity distribution requires vertices to have $m_{\mathrm{DV}}>3$ GeV.
Observed cross section upper 95% CL limits as a function of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $\tau$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}=100$ GeV. For the mass limits see the entry of Figure 8b.
Observed cross section upper 95% CL limits as a function of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $\tau$ for $\Delta m=100$ GeV. For the mass limits see the entry of Figure 9b.
Observed cross section upper 95% CL limits as a function of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $\tau$ for $\Delta m=100$ GeV. For the mass limits see the entry of Figure 9b.
Observed cross section upper 95% CL limits as a function of $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ and $m_{\tilde{g}}$ for $\tau = 1$ ns. For the mass limits see the entry of Figure 10b.
Observed cross section upper 95% CL limits as a function of $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ and $m_{\tilde{g}}$ for $\tau = 1$ ns. For the mass limits see the entry of Figure 10b.
Parameterized event selection efficiencies as a function of truth MET for events which have all truth decay vertices occurring before the start of the ATLAS calorimeter. Event-level efficiencies are evaluated for events that have truth MET $> 200$ GeV, pass the trackless jet requirement, and have at least one displaced truth decay within the fiducial volume. To satisfy the event-level efficiency, events must then pass the full event selection.
Parameterized event selection efficiencies as a function of truth MET for events which have all truth decay vertices occurring before the start of the ATLAS calorimeter. Event-level efficiencies are evaluated for events that have truth MET $> 200$ GeV, pass the trackless jet requirement, and have at least one displaced truth decay within the fiducial volume. To satisfy the event-level efficiency, events must then pass the full event selection.
Parameterized event selection efficiencies as a function of truth MET for events which have the furthest truth decay occurring inside the calorimeter. Event-level efficiencies are evaluated for events that have truth MET $> 200$ GeV, pass the trackless jet requirement, and have at least one displaced truth decay within the fiducial volume. To satisfy the event-level efficiency, events must then pass the full event selection.
Parameterized event selection efficiencies as a function of truth MET for events which have the furthest truth decay occurring inside the calorimeter. Event-level efficiencies are evaluated for events that have truth MET $> 200$ GeV, pass the trackless jet requirement, and have at least one displaced truth decay within the fiducial volume. To satisfy the event-level efficiency, events must then pass the full event selection.
Parameterized event selection efficiencies as a function of truth MET for events which have the furthest truth decay occurring after the end of the ATLAS calorimeter. Event-level efficiencies are evaluated for events that have truth MET $> 200$ GeV, pass the trackless jet requirement, and have at least one displaced truth decay within the fiducial volume. To satisfy the event-level efficiency, events must then pass the full event selection.
Parameterized event selection efficiencies as a function of truth MET for events which have the furthest truth decay occurring after the end of the ATLAS calorimeter. Event-level efficiencies are evaluated for events that have truth MET $> 200$ GeV, pass the trackless jet requirement, and have at least one displaced truth decay within the fiducial volume. To satisfy the event-level efficiency, events must then pass the full event selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 22$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 22$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $22$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 25$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $22$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 25$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $25$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 29$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $25$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 29$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=1.4$ TeV and fixed $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $29$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 38$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $29$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 38$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=2.0$ TeV and fixed $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $38$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 46$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $38$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 46$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Lower 95% CL limits on $m_{\tilde{g}}$ for fixed $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}=100$ GeV as a function of lifetime $\tau$.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $46$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 73$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $46$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 73$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $73$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 84$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $73$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 84$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $84$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 111$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $84$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 111$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $111$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 120$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $111$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 120$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=1.4$ TeV and fixed $\tau=1$ ns as a function of $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $120$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 145$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $120$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 145$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Upper 95% CL limits on the signal cross section for $m_{\tilde{g}}=2.0$ TeV and fixed $\tau=1$ ns as a function of $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $145$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 180$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $145$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 180$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Observed 95% CL limit as a function of $m_{\tilde{g}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ for fixed $\tau=1$ ns.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $180$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
Parameterized vertex level efficiencies as a function of number of particles associated to a truth decay vertex, and the vertex invariant mass for truth decays with $180$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm. Selected particles are required to have nonzero electric charge, $p_{T}(|Q|=1) > 1$ GeV, and $d_0 > 2$ mm. The per-vertex efficiency is evaluated only for truth vertices that have at least 5 associated tracks, an invariant mass $> 10$ GeV, and are in the region $4$ mm $< R_{\mathrm{decay}} < 300$ mm, and $|Z_{\mathrm{decay}}| < 300$ mm. A truth vertex satisfies the vertex level efficiency if it can be matched to a reconstructed DV which passes the final vertex selection.
A search for neutral heavy resonances is performed in the $WW\to e\nu\mu\nu$ decay channel using $pp$ collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$, collected at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. No evidence of such heavy resonances is found. In the search for production via the quark--antiquark annihilation or gluon--gluon fusion process, upper limits on $\sigma_X \times B(X \to WW)$ as a function of the resonance mass are obtained in the mass range between 200 GeV and up to 5 TeV for various benchmark models: a Higgs-like scalar in different width scenarios, a two-Higgs-doublet model, a heavy vector triplet model, and a warped extra dimensions model. In the vector-boson fusion process, constraints are also obtained on these resonances, as well as on a Higgs boson in the Georgi--Machacek model and a heavy tensor particle coupling only to gauge bosons.
Figure 1, left, subfigure a, Acceptance times efficiency as a function of signal mass for the ggF or qqA production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.
Figure 1, right, subfigure b, Acceptance times efficiency as a function of signal mass for the VBF production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.
Figure 2, left, subfigure a, Transverse mass distribution in the ggF top-quark control regions. For NWA signals, the "0" value means lack of statistics.
Figure 2, right, subfigure b, Transverse mass distribution in the VBF top-quark control regions. For NWA signals, the "0" value means lack of statistics.
Figure 3, left, subfigure a, Transverse mass distribution in the quasi-inclusive ggF WW control regions. The "0" value means lack of statistics.
Figure 3, right, subfigure b, Transverse mass distribution in the quasi-inclusive VBF1Jet WW control regions. The "0" value means lack of statistics.
Figure 4, top left, subfigure a, post-fit distributions of the transverse mass mT in the ggF Signal region. The "0" value means lack of statistics.
Figure 4, top right, subfigure b, post-fit distributions of the transverse mass mT in the VBF1Jet Signal region. The "0" value means lack of statistics.
Figure 4, bottom, subfigure c, post-fit distributions of the transverse mass mT in the VBF2Jet Signal region. The "0" value means lack of statistics.
Figure 5, left, subfigur a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for ggF signals with narrow-width lineshape as a function of the signal mass.
Figure 5, right, subfigure b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for VBF signals with narrow-width lineshape as a function of the signal mass.
Figure 6, Upper limits at 95% CL on the total ggF and VBF Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal at 800 GeV as a function of the ggF cross section divided by the combined ggF and VBF production cross section.
Figure 9, top left, subfigure a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction for a signal with a width of 15% of the mass for the ggF production.
Figure 9, top right, subfigure b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction for a signal with a width of 15% of the mass for the VBF production.
Figure 10, left, subfigure a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a GM signal.
Figure 11, left, subfigure a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a HVT qqA signal.
Figure 11, right, subfigure b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a HVT VBF signal.
Figure 12, bottom, subfigure c, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for an EML spin-2 VBF signal.
Figure 12, top right, subfigure b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a graviton signal with coupling parameter equals 0.5
Figure 12, top left, subfigure a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a graviton signal with coupling parameter equals 1.0
Auxiliary material Figure 2e, Event selection efficiencies in the VBF2J event categories as a function of the signal mass for the ggF or qqA production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.
Auxiliary material Figure 2f, Event selection efficiencies in the VBF2J event categories for different kinds of VBF signals production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.
Auxiliary material Figure 2c, Event selection efficiencies in the VBF1J event categories as a function of the signal mass for the ggF or qqA production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.
Auxiliary material Figure 2d, Event selection efficiencies in the VBF1J event categories for different kinds of VBF signals production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.
Auxiliary material Figure 2a, Event selection efficiencies in the ggF event categories as a function of the signal mass for the ggF or qqA production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.
Auxiliary material Figure 2b, Event selection efficiencies in the ggF event categories for different kinds of VBF signals production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.
Auxiliary material Figure 6a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal with a width of 5% of the mass for the ggF production.
Auxiliary material Figure 6c, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal with a width of 10% of the mass for the ggF production.
Auxiliary material Figure 6b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal with a width of 5% of the mass for the VBF production.
Auxiliary material Figure 6d, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal with a width of 10% of the mass for the VBF production.
Auxiliary material Figure 7b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the total ggF and VBF Higgs production cross section times branching fraction for a signal at 1.8 TeV as a function of the ggF cross section over the combined ggF and VBF production cross section.
Auxiliary material Figure 7a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the total ggF and VBF Higgs production cross section times branching fraction for a signal at 200 GeV as a function of the ggF cross section over the combined ggF and VBF production cross section.
The cross-section for the production of two jets in association with a leptonically decaying Z boson ($Zjj$) is measured in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, using data recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.2 fb$^{-1}$. The electroweak $Zjj$ cross-section is extracted in a fiducial region chosen to enhance the electroweak contribution relative to the dominant Drell-Yan $Zjj$ process, which is constrained using a data-driven approach. The measured fiducial electroweak cross-section is $\sigma^{Zjj}_{EW}= 119\pm 16 (\mathrm{stat.}) \pm 20 (\mathrm{syst.})\pm 2 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ for dijet invariant mass greater than 250 GeV, and $34.2\pm 5.8 (\mathrm{stat.})\pm 5.5 (\mathrm{syst.})\pm 0.7 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ for dijet invariant mass greater than 1 TeV. Standard Model predictions are in agreement with the measurements. The inclusive $Zjj$ cross-section is also measured in six different fiducial regions with varying contributions from electroweak and Drell-Yan $Zjj$ production.
Fiducial regions definitions
Measured and predicted inclusive Zjj production cross-sections in the six fiducial regions
Measured and predicted EW-Zjj production cross-sections in the EW-enriched fiducial regions with and without an additional kinematic requirement of $m_{jj} > $ 1 TeV
Data minus non-Zjj backgrounds in the EW-enriched fiducial region, statistical errors included
A search is performed for new phenomena in events having a photon with high transverse momentum and a jet collected in 36.7 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The invariant mass distribution of the leading photon and jet is examined to look for the resonant production of new particles or the presence of new high-mass states beyond the Standard Model. No significant deviation from the background-only hypothesis is observed and cross-section limits for generic Gaussian-shaped resonances are extracted. Excited quarks hypothesized in quark compositeness models and high-mass states predicted in quantum black hole models with extra dimensions are also examined in the analysis. The observed data exclude, at 95% confidence level, the mass range below 5.3 TeV for excited quarks and 7.1 TeV (4.4 TeV) for quantum black holes in the Arkani-Hamed-Dimopoulos-Dvali (Randall-Sundrum) model with six (one) extra dimensions.
Observed 95% CL upper limits on the production cross section times branching ratio to a photon and a quark or gluon for the excited-quarks model.The limits are placed as a function of m_q* for the excited-quark signal. The calculation is performed using ensemble tests for masses in the search range every 250 GeV up to 5 TeV and then 200 GeV up to 6 TeV.
Observed 95% CL upper limits on the production cross section times branching ratio to a photon and a quark or gluon for the RS1 model. The limits are placed as a function of M_th. The calculation is performed using ensemble tests for masses in the search range every 200 GeV.
Fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the excited quark model as a function of the excited-quark mass.
Observed 95% CL upper limits on the production cross section times branching ratio to a photon and a quark or gluon for the ADD model. The limits are placed as a function of M_th. The calculation is performed using ensemble tests for masses in the search range every 500 GeV.
Fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the ADD model as a function of M_th.
Fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the RS1 model as a function of M_th.
This paper presents single lepton and dilepton kinematic distributions measured in dileptonic $t\bar{t}$ events produced in 20.2 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV $pp$ collisions recorded by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. Both absolute and normalised differential cross-sections are measured, using events with an opposite-charge $e\mu$ pair and one or two $b$-tagged jets. The cross-sections are measured in a fiducial region corresponding to the detector acceptance for leptons, and are compared to the predictions from a variety of Monte Carlo event generators, as well as fixed-order QCD calculations, exploring the sensitivity of the cross-sections to the gluon parton distribution function. Some of the distributions are also sensitive to the top quark pole mass; a combined fit of NLO fixed-order predictions to all the measured distributions yields a top quark mass value of $m_t^{\rm pole}=173.2\pm 0.9\pm0.8\pm1.2$ GeV, where the three uncertainties arise from data statistics, experimental systematics, and theoretical sources.
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton eta. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton eta. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton eta. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton eta. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton rapidity. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton rapidity. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton rapidity. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton rapidity. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).
Measurements of $ZZ$ production in the $\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\ell^{\prime +}\ell^{\prime -}$ channel in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV center-of-mass energy at the Large Hadron Collider are presented. The data correspond to 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ of collisions collected by the ATLAS experiment in 2015 and 2016. Here $\ell$ and $\ell'$ stand for electrons or muons. Integrated and differential $ZZ \to \ell^{+}\ell^{-}\ell^{\prime +}\ell^{\prime -}$ cross sections with $Z \to \ell^+\ell^-$ candidate masses in the range of 66 GeV to 116 GeV are measured in a fiducial phase space corresponding to the detector acceptance and corrected for detector effects. The differential cross sections are presented in bins of twenty observables, including several that describe the jet activity. The integrated cross section is also extrapolated to a total phase space and to all Standard-Model decays of $Z$ bosons with mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV, resulting in a value of $17.3 \pm 0.9$ [$\pm 0.6$ (stat.) $\pm 0.5$ (syst.) $\pm 0.6$ (lumi.)] pb. The measurements are found to be in good agreement with the Standard-Model predictions. A search for neutral triple gauge couplings is performed using the transverse momentum distribution of the leading $Z$-boson candidate. No evidence for such couplings is found and exclusion limits are set on their parameters.
Integrated fiducial cross sections. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the leading Z candidate. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the leading Z candidate.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the leading Z candidate.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the leading Z candidate.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the leading Z candidate., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the leading Z candidate., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the subleading Z candidate. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the subleading Z candidate.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the subleading Z candidate.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the subleading Z candidate.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the subleading Z candidate., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the subleading Z candidate., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the 1. lepton. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the 1. lepton.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the 1. lepton.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the 1. lepton.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 1. lepton., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 1. lepton., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the 2. lepton. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the 2. lepton.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the 2. lepton.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the 2. lepton.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 2. lepton., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 2. lepton., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the 3. lepton. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the 3. lepton.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the 3. lepton.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the 3. lepton.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 3. lepton., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 3. lepton., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the 4. lepton. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the 4. lepton.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the 4. lepton.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the 4. lepton.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 4. lepton., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 4. lepton., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system.
Observed data events as function of the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system.
Response matrix for the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the Rapidity separation of the Z candidates. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the Rapidity separation of the Z candidates.
Observed data events as function of the Rapidity separation of the Z candidates.
Response matrix for the Rapidity separation of the Z candidates.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the Rapidity separation of the Z candidates., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the Rapidity separation of the Z candidates., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the azimuthal-angle separation of the Z candidates. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the azimuthal-angle separation of the Z candidates.
Observed data events as function of the azimuthal-angle separation of the Z candidates.
Response matrix for the azimuthal-angle separation of the Z candidates.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the azimuthal-angle separation of the Z candidates., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the azimuthal-angle separation of the Z candidates., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the jet multiplicity. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the jet multiplicity.
Observed data events as function of the jet multiplicity.
Response matrix for the jet multiplicity.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the jet multiplicity., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the jet multiplicity., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the central-jet multiplicity. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the central-jet multiplicity.
Observed data events as function of the central-jet multiplicity.
Response matrix for the central-jet multiplicity.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the central-jet multiplicity., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the central-jet multiplicity., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the multiplicity of jets with pT > 60 GeV. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the multiplicity of jets with pT > 60 GeV.
Observed data events as function of the multiplicity of jets with pT > 60 GeV.
Response matrix for the multiplicity of jets with pT > 60 GeV.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the multiplicity of jets with pT > 60 GeV., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the multiplicity of jets with pT > 60 GeV., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the mass of dijet formed of the two leading jets. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the mass of dijet formed of the two leading jets.
Observed data events as function of the mass of dijet formed of the two leading jets.
Response matrix for the mass of dijet formed of the two leading jets.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the mass of dijet formed of the two leading jets., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the mass of dijet formed of the two leading jets., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the rapidity separation of the two leading jets. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the rapidity separation of the two leading jets.
Observed data events as function of the rapidity separation of the two leading jets.
Response matrix for the rapidity separation of the two leading jets.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the rapidity separation of the two leading jets., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the rapidity separation of the two leading jets., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the scalar transverse-momentum sum of jets. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the scalar transverse-momentum sum of jets.
Observed data events as function of the scalar transverse-momentum sum of jets.
Response matrix for the scalar transverse-momentum sum of jets.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the scalar transverse-momentum sum of jets., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the scalar transverse-momentum sum of jets., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 1. jet. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 1. jet.
Observed data events as function of the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 1. jet.
Response matrix for the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 1. jet.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 1. jet., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 1. jet., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 2. jet.
Predicted background as function of the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 2. jet.
Observed data events as function of the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 2. jet.
Response matrix for the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 2. jet.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 2. jet., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the absolute pseudorapitidy of the 2. jet., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the 1. jet. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the 1. jet.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the 1. jet.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the 1. jet.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 1. jet., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 1. jet., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Differential fiducial cross section as function of the transverse momentum of the 2. jet. Fiducial phase space - At least 4 electrons, 4 muons, or 2 electrons and 2 muons forming two same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons (Z candidates) - Lepton pairing ambiguities are resolved by choosing the combination that results in the smaller value of the sum of |mll - mZ| for the two pairs, where mll is the mass of the dilepton system and mZ the Z boson pole mass - Lepton absolute pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.7 - Lepton transverse momentum pT > 5 GeV - The three leading-pT leptons satisfy pT > 20 GeV, 15 GeV, 10 GeV - Angular separation of any same-flavour (opposite-flavour) leptons DeltaR > 0.1 (0.2) - Both chosen dileptons have invariant mass between 66 GeV and 116 GeV - All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons have mass > 5 GeV Details about the fiducial definition as well as all other aspects of the analysis can be found in the journal publication.
Predicted background as function of the transverse momentum of the 2. jet.
Observed data events as function of the transverse momentum of the 2. jet.
Response matrix for the transverse momentum of the 2. jet.
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 2. jet., considering only correlations of the statistical uncertainty of the data. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
Correlation matrix of cross section uncertainties for the transverse momentum of the 2. jet., considering correlations of both the statistical uncertainty of the data and systematic uncertainties entering via background subtraction and unfolding. The correlations are given between bins of the unfolded cross section
The analysis of the momentum difference between charged hadrons in high-energy proton-proton collisions is performed in order to study coherent particle production. The observed correlation pattern agrees with a model of a helical QCD string fragmenting into a chain of ground-state hadrons. A threshold momentum difference in the production of adjacent pairs of charged hadrons is observed, in agreement with model predictions. The presence of low-mass hadron chains also explains the emergence of charge-combination-dependent two-particle correlations commonly attributed to Bose-Einstein interference. The data sample consists of 190 inverse microbarns of minimum bias events collected with proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 7 TeV in the early low-luminosity data taking with the ATLAS detector at the LHC.
The inclusive Delta as a function of $Q$, in the interval 0.02 GeV < Q < 2 GeV.
The Delta(3h), for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV, as a function of $Q$, in the interval 0.02 GeV < Q < 0.36 GeV.
The Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).
The statistical error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).
The bin-uncorrelated systematic error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).
The bin-correlated systematic error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).
A search for heavy neutral Higgs bosons and $Z^{\prime}$ bosons is performed using a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ from proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV recorded by the ATLAS detector at the LHC during 2015 and 2016. The heavy resonance is assumed to decay to $\tau^+\tau^-$ with at least one tau lepton decaying to final states with hadrons and a neutrino. The search is performed in the mass range of 0.2-2.25 TeV for Higgs bosons and 0.2-4.0 TeV for $Z^{\prime}$ bosons. The data are in good agreement with the background predicted by the Standard Model. The results are interpreted in benchmark scenarios. In the context of the hMSSM scenario, the data exclude $\tan\beta > 1.0$ for $m_A$ = 0.25 TeV and $\tan\beta > 42$ for $m_A$ = 1.5 TeV at the 95% confidence level. For the Sequential Standard Model, $Z^{\prime}_\mathrm{SSM}$ with $m_{Z^{\prime}} < 2.42$ TeV is excluded at 95% confidence level, while $Z^{\prime}_\mathrm{NU}$ with $m_{Z^{\prime}} < 2.25$ TeV is excluded for the non-universal $G(221)$ model that exhibits enhanced couplings to third-generation fermions.
Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-veto category of the 1l1tau_h channel. Despite listing this as an exclusive final state (as there must be no b-jets), there is no explicit selection on the presence of additional light-flavour jets. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. In the paper, the first bin is cut off at 60 GeV for aesthetics but contains underflows down to 50 GeV as in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 300, 500 and 800 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 10 in the hMSSM scenario are also provided.
Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-tag category of the 1l1tau_h channel. Despite listing this as an exclusive final state (as there must be at least one b-jets), there is no explicit selection on the presence of additional light-flavour jets. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. In the paper, the first bin is cut off at 60 GeV for aesthetics but contains underflows down to 50 GeV as in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 300, 500 and 800 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 10 in the hMSSM scenario are also provided.
Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-veto category of the 2tau_h channel. Despite listing this as an exclusive final state (as there must be no b-jets), there is no explicit selection on the presence of additional light-flavour jets. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 300, 500 and 800 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 10 in the hMSSM scenario are also provided.
Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-tag category of the 2tau_h channel. Despite listing this as an exclusive final state (as there must be at least one b-jets), there is no explicit selection on the presence of additional light-flavour jets. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 300, 500 and 800 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 10 in the hMSSM scenario are also provided.
Observed and predicted mTtot distribution for the b-inclusive selection in the 1l1tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. In the paper, the first bin is cut off at 60 GeV for aesthetics but contains underflows down to 50 GeV as in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The prediction for a SSM Zprime with masses of 1500, 2000 and 2500 GeV are also provided.
Observed and predicted mTtot distribution for the b-inclusive selection in the 2tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The prediction for a SSM Zprime with masses of 1500, 2000 and 2500 GeV are also provided.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the b-associated Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the boson mass.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the Drell Yan production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the Zprime boson mass.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the boson mass and the relative strength of the b-associated production.
Ratio of the 95% CL upper limits on the production cross section times branching fraction for alternate Zprime models with respect to the SSM, both observed and expected are shown.
Acceptance, acceptance times efficiency and b-tag category fraction for a scalar boson produced by gluon-gluon fusion as a function of the scalar boson mass.
Acceptance, acceptance times efficiency and b-tag category fraction for a scalar boson produced by b-associated production as a function of the scalar boson mass.
Acceptance and acceptance times efficiency for a heavy gauge boson produced by Drell Yan as a function of the gauge boson mass.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the gluon-gluon fusion Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the boson mass.
A search for heavy resonances decaying into a Higgs boson ($H$) and a new particle ($X$) is reported, utilizing 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV collected during 2015 and 2016 with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The particle $X$ is assumed to decay to a pair of light quarks, and the fully hadronic final state $XH \rightarrow q\bar q'b\bar b$ is analysed. The search considers the regime of high $XH$ resonance masses, where the $X$ and $H$ bosons are both highly Lorentz-boosted and are each reconstructed using a single jet with large radius parameter. A two-dimensional phase space of $XH$ mass versus $X$ mass is scanned for evidence of a signal, over a range of $XH$ resonance mass values between 1 TeV and 4 TeV, and for $X$ particles with masses from 50 GeV to 1000 GeV. All search results are consistent with the expectations for the background due to Standard Model processes, and 95% CL upper limits are set, as a function of $XH$ and $X$ masses, on the production cross-section of the $XH\rightarrow q\bar q'b\bar b$ resonance.
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
mass distribution
A search for pair production of a scalar partner of the top quark in events with four or more jets plus missing transverse momentum is presented. An analysis of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV proton-proton collisions collected using the ATLAS detector at the LHC yields no significant excess over the expected Standard Model background. To interpret the results a simplified supersymmetric model is used where the top squark is assumed to decay via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ and $\tilde{t}_1\rightarrow b\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \rightarrow b W^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, where $\tilde\chi^0_1$ ($\chi^\pm_1$) denotes the lightest neutralino (chargino). Exclusion limits are placed in terms of the top-squark and neutralino masses. Assuming a branching ratio of 100% to $t \tilde\chi^0_1$, top-squark masses in the range 450-950 GeV are excluded for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ masses below 160 GeV. In the case where $m_{\tilde{t}_1}\sim m_t+m_{\tilde\chi^0_1}$, top-squark masses in the range 235-590 GeV are excluded.
Distribution of $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ for SRA-TT after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ for SRA-TT after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ for SRA-TT after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ for SRA-TT after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ for SRA-TT after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ for SRA-TT after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ for SRA-TT after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T2}^{\chi^2}$ for SRA-T0 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T2}^{\chi^2}$ for SRA-T0 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T2}^{\chi^2}$ for SRA-T0 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T2}^{\chi^2}$ for SRA-T0 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T2}^{\chi^2}$ for SRA-T0 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T2}^{\chi^2}$ for SRA-T0 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T2}^{\chi^2}$ for SRA-T0 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRB-TW after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRB-TW after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRB-TW after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRB-TW after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRB-TW after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRB-TW after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRB-TW after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $R_\text{ISR}$ for SRC1-5 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $R_\text{ISR}$ for SRC1-5 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $R_\text{ISR}$ for SRC1-5 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $R_\text{ISR}$ for SRC1-5 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $R_\text{ISR}$ for SRC1-5 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $R_\text{ISR}$ for SRC1-5 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $R_\text{ISR}$ for SRC1-5 after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRD-high after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRD-high after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRD-high after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRD-high after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRD-high after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRD-high after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $m_\text{T}^{b,\text{max}}$ for SRD-high after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $H_\text{T}$ for SRE after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $H_\text{T}$ for SRE after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $H_\text{T}$ for SRE after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $H_\text{T}$ for SRE after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $H_\text{T}$ for SRE after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $H_\text{T}$ for SRE after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Distribution of $H_\text{T}$ for SRE after the likelihood fit. The stacked histograms show the SM expectation and the hatched uncertainty band around the SM expectation shows the MC statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainties. A representative signal point is shown for each distribution.
Expected (blue solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Expected (blue solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Expected (blue solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Expected (blue solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Expected (blue solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Expected (blue solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Expected (blue solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Observed (red solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Observed (red solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Observed (red solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Observed (red solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Observed (red solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Observed (red solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Observed (red solid line) exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of stop and LSP masses in the scenario where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses and branching fraction to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ in the Natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid scenario where $m_{\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}}=m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$+1 GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a large tan$\beta$ assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}}$ for the pMSSM-inspired non-asymptotic Higgsino simplified model for a small right-handed top-squark mass parameter assumption.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a negative value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for the Wino NLSP pMSSM model for a positive value of $\mu$.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the left-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ masses for for the right-handed top-squark mass parameter scan in the well-tempered pMSSM model.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL exclusion as a function of $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{t}$ masses in the scenario where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t}\to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Results of the exclusion fits for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ from the combination of SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD and SRE, based on the best expected $CL_s$. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate which of the signal regions gave the best expected $CL_s$ (with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 corresponding to SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low,SR D-high, SRE respectively).
Results of the exclusion fits for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ from the combination of SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD and SRE, based on the best expected $CL_s$. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate which of the signal regions gave the best expected $CL_s$ (with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 corresponding to SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low,SR D-high, SRE respectively).
Results of the exclusion fits for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ from the combination of SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD and SRE, based on the best expected $CL_s$. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate which of the signal regions gave the best expected $CL_s$ (with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 corresponding to SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low,SR D-high, SRE respectively).
Results of the exclusion fits for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ from the combination of SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD and SRE, based on the best expected $CL_s$. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate which of the signal regions gave the best expected $CL_s$ (with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 corresponding to SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low,SR D-high, SRE respectively).
Results of the exclusion fits for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ from the combination of SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD and SRE, based on the best expected $CL_s$. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate which of the signal regions gave the best expected $CL_s$ (with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 corresponding to SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low,SR D-high, SRE respectively).
Results of the exclusion fits for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ from the combination of SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD and SRE, based on the best expected $CL_s$. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate which of the signal regions gave the best expected $CL_s$ (with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 corresponding to SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low,SR D-high, SRE respectively).
Results of the exclusion fits for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ from the combination of SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD and SRE, based on the best expected $CL_s$. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate which of the signal regions gave the best expected $CL_s$ (with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 corresponding to SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low,SR D-high, SRE respectively).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 25%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 25%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 25%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 25%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 25%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 25%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 25%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 50%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 50%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 50%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 50%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 50%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 50%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 50%. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0 (top left), 25% (top right), 50% (middle left), 75% middle right) and 100% (bottom). The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0 (top left), 25% (top right), 50% (middle left), 75% middle right) and 100% (bottom). The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0 (top left), 25% (top right), 50% (middle left), 75% middle right) and 100% (bottom). The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0 (top left), 25% (top right), 50% (middle left), 75% middle right) and 100% (bottom). The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0 (top left), 25% (top right), 50% (middle left), 75% middle right) and 100% (bottom). The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0 (top left), 25% (top right), 50% (middle left), 75% middle right) and 100% (bottom). The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the grid with two stop decay channels: $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV. The results are shown as a function of the branching ratio to $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$: 0 (top left), 25% (top right), 50% (middle left), 75% middle right) and 100% (bottom). The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRC, SRD-low and SRD-high, The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high, 5: SRC).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for negative values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for negative values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for negative values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for negative values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for negative values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for negative values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for negative values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for positive values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for positive values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for positive values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for positive values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for positive values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for positive values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the wino NLSP grid for positive values of $\mu$. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{q3L}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{q3L}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{q3L}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{q3L}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{q3L}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{q3L}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{q3L}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{tR}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{tR}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{tR}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{tR}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{tR}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{tR}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the well-tempered neutralino grid for the $m_{tR}$ scenario. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 4: SRD-low, 5: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with large tan$\beta$ (top left) is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with large tan$\beta$ (top left) is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with large tan$\beta$ (top left) is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with large tan$\beta$ (top left) is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with large tan$\beta$ (top left) is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with large tan$\beta$ (top left) is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with large tan$\beta$ (top left) is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with small tan$\beta$ are shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with small tan$\beta$ are shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with small tan$\beta$ are shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with small tan$\beta$ are shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with small tan$\beta$ are shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with small tan$\beta$ are shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenarios with small tan$\beta$ are shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenario with a mostly right-handed top squark partner is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenario with a mostly right-handed top squark partner is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenario with a mostly right-handed top squark partner is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenario with a mostly right-handed top squark partner is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenario with a mostly right-handed top squark partner is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenario with a mostly right-handed top squark partner is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Results of the exclusion fits in the non-asymptotic higgsino grid with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}}) - m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 5$ GeV. A scenario with a mostly right-handed top squark partner is shown. The results are based on taking the signal region with the best expected $CL_s$, using SRA, SRB, SRD-low and SRD-high, where SRA and SRB are the statistical combinations of their respective regions. The numbers centered on the grid points indicate the signal region used (1: SRA, 2: SRB, 3: SRD-low, 4: SRD-high).
Acceptance for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Acceptance for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Acceptance for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TT for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRE for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-TW for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRA-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRB-T0 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC1 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC2 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC3 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC4 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRC5 for top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$.
Efficiencies for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-low for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRD-high for the natural SUSY-inspired mixed grid in which two decay modes are considered, the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ and $\tilde{t}\to b \tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}} \to b W^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$, with $m(\tilde{\chi^{\pm}_{1}})-m(\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}) = 1$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Efficiencies for SRE for gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}})=5$ GeV.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{t}\to t^{(*)} \tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}$ grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft grid.
Upper limit cross-section, in femtobarn, for the $\tilde{g}\to t \tilde{t} \to t\tilde{\chi^{0}_{1}}+$soft grid.
Cutflow for SRA for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (800,1) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRA for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (800,1) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRA for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (800,1) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRA for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (800,1) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRA for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (800,1) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRA for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (800,1) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRA for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (800,1) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow SRB for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (600,300) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow SRB for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (600,300) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow SRB for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (600,300) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow SRB for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (600,300) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow SRB for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (600,300) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow SRB for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (600,300) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow SRB for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (600,300) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC1 and SRC2 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (250,77) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC1 and SRC2 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (250,77) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC1 and SRC2 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (250,77) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC1 and SRC2 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (250,77) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC1 and SRC2 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (250,77) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC1 and SRC2 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (250,77) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC1 and SRC2 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (250,77) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC3, SRC4, and SRC5 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (500,327) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC3, SRC4, and SRC5 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (500,327) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC3, SRC4, and SRC5 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (500,327) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC3, SRC4, and SRC5 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (500,327) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC3, SRC4, and SRC5 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (500,327) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC3, SRC4, and SRC5 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (500,327) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRC3, SRC4, and SRC5 for a signal model with top squark pair production in the case where both top squarks decay via $\tilde{t}_1\to t^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$ with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^0_1)=$ (500,327) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-high for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV with $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (800,100) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-high for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV with $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (750,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-high for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV with $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (750,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-high for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV with $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (750,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-high for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV with $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (800,100) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-high for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV with $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (750,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-high for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV with $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (750,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-low for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV witht $m(\tilde{t}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (600,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-low for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV witht $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (400,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-low for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV witht $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (400,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-low for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV witht $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (400,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-low for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV witht $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (600,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-low for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV witht $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (400,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRD-low for a signal model with bottom squark pair production in the case where both bottom squarks decay via $b\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1\to bW^{(*)} \tilde\chi^0_1$, with $m(\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)-m(\tilde\chi^0_1) = 1$ GeV witht $m(\tilde{b}_1,\tilde\chi^{\pm}_1)=$ (400,200) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRE for a signal model with gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t\tilde{t}_1\to t\tilde\chi^0_1+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_1, \tilde\chi^0_1)=5$ GeV with $m(\tilde{g},\tilde{t}_1)=$ (1700,400) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRE for a signal model with gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t\tilde{t}_1\to t\tilde\chi^0_1+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_1, \tilde\chi^0_1)=5$ GeV with $m(\tilde{g},\tilde{t}_1)=$ (1700,400) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRE for a signal model with gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t\tilde{t}_1\to t\tilde\chi^0_1+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_1, \tilde\chi^0_1)=5$ GeV with $m(\tilde{g},\tilde{t}_1)=$ (1700,400) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRE for a signal model with gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t\tilde{t}_1\to t\tilde\chi^0_1+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_1, \tilde\chi^0_1)=5$ GeV with $m(\tilde{g},\tilde{t}_1)=$ (1700,400) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRE for a signal model with gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t\tilde{t}_1\to t\tilde\chi^0_1+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_1, \tilde\chi^0_1)=5$ GeV with $m(\tilde{g},\tilde{t}_1)=$ (1700,400) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRE for a signal model with gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t\tilde{t}_1\to t\tilde\chi^0_1+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_1, \tilde\chi^0_1)=5$ GeV with $m(\tilde{g},\tilde{t}_1)=$ (1700,400) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
Cutflow for SRE for a signal model with gluino pair production in the case where both gluinos decay via $\tilde{g}\to t\tilde{t}_1\to t\tilde\chi^0_1+$soft and $\Delta m(\tilde{t}_1, \tilde\chi^0_1)=5$ GeV with $m(\tilde{g},\tilde{t}_1)=$ (1700,400) GeV. An integrated luminosity of 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ is assumed when calculating the weighted yields. For the derivation skim at least one of the following four criteria is required: $H_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 150 GeV; at least one loose electron with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two loose electrons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; at least one muon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two muons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 20 GeV; or at least one photon with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 100 GeV or at least two photons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ $>$ 50 GeV.
This paper presents a measurement of the polarisation of $\tau$ leptons produced in $Z/\gamma^{*}\rightarrow\tau\tau$ decays which is performed with a dataset of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 20.2 fb$^{-1}$ recorded with the ATLAS detector at the LHC in 2012. The $Z/\gamma^{*}\rightarrow\tau\tau$ decays are reconstructed from a hadronically decaying $\tau$ lepton with a single charged particle in the final state, accompanied by a $\tau$ lepton that decays leptonically. The $\tau$ polarisation is inferred from the relative fraction of energy carried by charged and neutral hadrons in the hadronic $\tau$ decays. The polarisation is measured in a fiducial region that corresponds to the kinematic region accessible to this analysis. The $\tau$ polarisation extracted over the full phase space within the $Z/\gamma^{*}$ mass range of 66$ < m_{Z/\gamma^{*}} < $ 116 GeV is found to be $P_{\tau} =-0.14 \pm 0.02 (\text{stat}) \pm 0.04 (\text{syst})$. It is in agreement with the Standard Model prediction of $P_{\tau} =-0.1517 \pm 0.0019$, which is obtained from the ALPGEN event generator interfaced with the PYTHIA 6 parton shower modelling and the TAUOLA $\tau$ decay library.
The measured polarisation values (fiducial and extracted to full phase-space) for electron-hadron and muon-hadron channels as well as combined.
Definition of fiducial region of the analysis. The requirements are applied at stable-particle level.
Impact of individual systematic uncertainties on full and fiducial polarisation.
Impact of individual systematic uncertainties on full and fiducial polarisation in e-had channel.
Impact of individual systematic uncertainties on full and fiducial polarisation in mu-had channel.
Selection efficiency for signal events in the e-had channel. The last bin is for overflow.
Selection efficiency for signal events in the mu-had channel. The last bin is for overflow.
Selection efficiency for signal events in the e-had channel for events in the fiducial region only. The last bin is for overflow.
Selection efficiency for signal events in the mu-had channel for events in the fiducial region only. The last bin is for overflow.
The modification of the production of $J/\psi$, $\psi(\mathrm{2S})$, and $\mit{\Upsilon}(n\mathrm{S})$ ($n = 1, 2, 3$) in $p$+Pb collisions with respect to their production in $pp$ collisions has been studied. The $p$+Pb and $pp$ datasets used in this paper correspond to integrated luminosities of $28$ $\mathrm{nb}^{-1}$ and $25$ $\mathrm{pb}^{-1}$ respectively, collected in 2013 and 2015 by the ATLAS detector at the LHC, both at a centre-of-mass energy per nucleon pair of 5.02 TeV. The quarkonium states are reconstructed in the dimuon decay channel. The yields of $J/\psi$ and $\psi(\mathrm{2S})$ are separated into prompt and non-prompt sources. The measured quarkonium differential cross sections are presented as a function of rapidity and transverse momentum, as is the nuclear modification factor, $R_{p\mathrm{Pb}}$ for $J/\psi$ and $\mit{\Upsilon}(\mathrm{1S})$. No significant modification of the $J/\psi$ production is observed while $\mit{\Upsilon}(\mathrm{1S})$ production is found to be suppressed at low transverse momentum in $p$+Pb collisions relative to $pp$ collisions. The production of excited charmonium and bottomonium states is found to be suppressed relative to that of the ground states in central $p$+Pb collisions.
Summary of results for cross-section of non-prompt J/psi decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of non-prompt psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of prompt J/psi decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of prompt psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(1S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(2S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(3S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of J/psi decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of J/psi decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapdiity in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapdiity in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(nS) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(nS) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for RpPb of prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for RpPb of non-prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for RpPb of prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for RpPb of non-prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for RpPb of Upsilon(1S) in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for RpPb of Upsilon(1S) in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for RpPb of quarkonia (prompt J/psi, non-prompt J/psi, prompt psi(2S), Upsilon(1S)) to RpPb of Z ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for quarkonia self-normalized yields in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of self-normalized event activity. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for prompt Psi(2S) to J/psi double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapidity. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for Upsilon(2S) and Upsilon(3S) to Upsilon(1S) double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for prompt Psi(2S) and J/psi double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
Summary of results for Upsilon(2S) and Upsilon(3S) to Upsilon(1S) double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.
A search for an invisibly decaying Higgs boson or dark matter candidates produced in association with a leptonically decaying $Z$ boson in proton--proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV is presented. This search uses 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of data collected by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. No significant deviation from the expectation of the Standard Model backgrounds is observed. Assuming the Standard Model $ZH$ production cross-section, an observed (expected) upper limit of 67% (39%) at the 95% confidence level is set on the branching ratio of invisible decays of the Higgs boson with mass $m_H = $ 125 GeV. The corresponding limits on the production cross-section of the $ZH$ process with the invisible Higgs boson decays are also presented. Furthermore, exclusion limits on the dark matter candidate and mediator masses are reported in the framework of simplified dark matter models.
Observed E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in the ee channel compared to the signal and background predictions. The error band shows the total statistical and systematic uncertainty on the background prediction. The background predictions are presented as they are before being fit to the data. The ratio plot gives the observed data yield over the background prediction (black points) as well as the signal-plus-background contribution divided by the background prediction (blue or purple line) in each E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> bin. The rightmost bin contains the overflow contributions. The ZH → ℓℓ + inv signal distribution is shown with BR<sub>H → inv</sub> =0.3, which is the value most compatible with data. The simulated DM distribution with m<sub>med</sub> = 500 GeV and m<sub>χ</sub> = 100 GeV is also scaled (with a factor of 0.27) to the best-fit contribution.
Observed E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in the μμ channel compared to the signal and background predictions. The error band shows the total statistical and systematic uncertainty on the background prediction. The background predictions are presented as they are before being fit to the data. The ratio plot gives the observed data yield over the background prediction (black points) as well as the signal-plus-background contribution divided by the background prediction (blue or purple line) in each E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> bin. The rightmost bin contains the overflow contributions. The ZH → ℓℓ + inv signal distribution is shown with BR<sub>H → inv</sub> =0.3, which is the value most compatible with data. The simulated DM distribution with m<sub>med</sub> = 500 GeV and m<sub>χ</sub> = 100 GeV is also scaled (with a factor of 0.27) to the best-fit contribution.
DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of WIMP mass m<sub>χ</sub> vs mediator mass m<sub>med</sub> determined using the combined ee+μμ channel. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m<sub>med</sub> = 2m<sub>χ</sub>'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs, and the other grey line gives the perturbative limit (arXiv 1603.04156). The relic density line (arXiv 1603.04156) illustrates the combination of m<sub>χ</sub> and m<sub>med</sub> that would explain the observed DM relic density.
DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of WIMP mass m<sub>χ</sub> vs mediator mass m<sub>med</sub> determined using the combined ee+μμ channel. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m<sub>med</sub> = 2m<sub>χ</sub>'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs, and the other grey line gives the perturbative limit (arXiv 1603.04156). The relic density line (arXiv 1603.04156) illustrates the combination of m<sub>χ</sub> and m<sub>med</sub> that would explain the observed DM relic density.
DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of WIMP mass m<sub>χ</sub> vs mediator mass m<sub>med</sub> determined using the combined ee+μμ channel. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m<sub>med</sub> = 2m<sub>χ</sub>'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs, and the other grey line gives the perturbative limit (arXiv 1603.04156). The relic density line (arXiv 1603.04156) illustrates the combination of m<sub>χ</sub> and m<sub>med</sub> that would explain the observed DM relic density.
DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of WIMP mass m<sub>χ</sub> vs mediator mass m<sub>med</sub> determined using the combined ee+μμ channel. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m<sub>med</sub> = 2m<sub>χ</sub>'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs, and the other grey line gives the perturbative limit (arXiv 1603.04156). The relic density line (arXiv 1603.04156) illustrates the combination of m<sub>χ</sub> and m<sub>med</sub> that would explain the observed DM relic density.
The 95% CL upper limits on the production cross-section of the ZH process with the prompt Z→ ee and Z→ μμ decays and the invisible Higgs boson decays as a function of m<sub>H</sub>, obtained from the combined ee+μμ channel. The observed and expected limits are given, as well as the ±1σ and ±2σ error bands on the expected limits. The signal process is only modelled for the qq initial state, and the theory uncertainties on the signal prediction are not considered.
DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of m<sub>χ</sub> vs m<sub>med</sub> set using the combined ee+μμ channel. The DM model assumes a vector mediator, a fermionic WIMP, and the coupling parameters g<sub>q</sub> = 0.25 and g<sub>χ</sub> = 1. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m<sub>med</sub> = 2m<sub>χ</sub>'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs. The relic density line [arXiv 1603.04156] illustrates the combination of m<sub>χ</sub> and m<sub>med</sub> that would explain the observed DM relic density.
DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of m<sub>χ</sub> vs m<sub>med</sub> set using the combined ee+μμ channel. The DM model assumes a vector mediator, a fermionic WIMP, and the coupling parameters g<sub>q</sub> = 0.25 and g<sub>χ</sub> = 1. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m<sub>med</sub> = 2m<sub>χ</sub>'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs. The relic density line [arXiv 1603.04156] illustrates the combination of m<sub>χ</sub> and m<sub>med</sub> that would explain the observed DM relic density.
DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of m<sub>χ</sub> vs m<sub>med</sub> set using the combined ee+μμ channel. The DM model assumes a vector mediator, a fermionic WIMP, and the coupling parameters g<sub>q</sub> = 0.25 and g<sub>χ</sub> = 1. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m<sub>med</sub> = 2m<sub>χ</sub>'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs. The relic density line [arXiv 1603.04156] illustrates the combination of m<sub>χ</sub> and m<sub>med</sub> that would explain the observed DM relic density.
DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of m<sub>χ</sub> vs m<sub>med</sub> set using the combined ee+μμ channel. The DM model assumes a vector mediator, a fermionic WIMP, and the coupling parameters g<sub>q</sub> = 0.25 and g<sub>χ</sub> = 1. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m<sub>med</sub> = 2m<sub>χ</sub>'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs. The relic density line [arXiv 1603.04156] illustrates the combination of m<sub>χ</sub> and m<sub>med</sub> that would explain the observed DM relic density.
Limits on the WIMP and proton scattering cross section as a function of WIMP mass, obtained for simplified dark matter models with an axial-vector mediator (left) and a vector mediator (right). The solid black line shows the observed limit at the 90% confidence level from this search. The left plot incorporates the latest results from these competitive direct-search experiments, LUX [arXiv 1705.03380], PICO-2L [Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 231302], and PICO-60 [arXiv 1702.07666]. The right plot incorporates the latest results from the following experiments, CRESST-II [Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016) 25], CDMSlite [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 071301], PandaX-II [Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) 121303], LUX [Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 021303], and XENON1T [arXiv 1705.06655].
Limits on the WIMP and proton scattering cross section as a function of WIMP mass, obtained for simplified dark matter models with an axial-vector mediator (left) and a vector mediator (right). The solid black line shows the observed limit at the 90% confidence level from this search. The left plot incorporates the latest results from these competitive direct-search experiments, LUX [arXiv 1705.03380], PICO-2L [Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 231302], and PICO-60 [arXiv 1702.07666]. The right plot incorporates the latest results from the following experiments, CRESST-II [Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016) 25], CDMSlite [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 071301], PandaX-II [Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) 121303], LUX [Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 021303], and XENON1T [arXiv 1705.06655].
This paper reports searches for heavy resonances decaying into $ZZ$ or $ZW$ using data from proton--proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV. The data, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$, were recorded with the ATLAS detector in 2015 and 2016 at the Large Hadron Collider. The searches are performed in final states in which one $Z$ boson decays into either a pair of light charged leptons (electrons and muons) or a pair of neutrinos, and the associated $W$ boson or the other $Z$ boson decays hadronically. No evidence of the production of heavy resonances is observed. Upper bounds on the production cross sections of heavy resonances times their decay branching ratios to $ZZ$ or $ZW$ are derived in the mass range 300--5000 GeV within the context of Standard Model extensions with additional Higgs bosons, a heavy vector triplet or warped extra dimensions. Production through gluon--gluon fusion, Drell--Yan or vector-boson fusion are considered, depending on the assumed model.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for ggF H -> Z Z -> llqq as a function of the Higgs boson mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions of the ZV -> llJ selection and the b-tagged and untagged regions of the ZV -> lljj selection.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for VBF H -> Z Z -> llqq as a function of the Higgs boson mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions of the ZV -> llJ selection and the b-tagged and untagged regions of the ZV -> lljj selection.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for ggF H -> Z Z -> vvqq as a function of the Higgs boson mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for VBF H -> ZZ -> vvqq as a function of the Higgs boson mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for DY W' -> ZW -> llqq as a function of the W' mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions of the ZV -> llJ selection and the b-tagged and untagged regions of the ZV -> lljj selection.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for VBF W' -> ZW -> llqq as a function of the W' mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions of the ZV -> llJ selection and the b-tagged and untagged regions of the ZV -> lljj selection.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for DY W' -> ZW -> vvqq as a function of the W' mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for VBF W' -> ZW -> vvqq as a function of the W' mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for G* -> ZZ -> llqq as a function of the W' mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions of the ZV -> llJ selection and the b-tagged and untagged regions of the ZV -> lljj selection.
Selection acceptance times efficiency for G* -> ZZ -> vvqq as a function of the W' mass, combining the HP and LP signal regions.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma\times$BR($H\to ZZ$) at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV for ggF production of a heavy Higgs boson as a function of its mass, combining $\ell\ell qq$ and $\nu\nu qq$ searches.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma\times$BR($H\to ZZ$) at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV for VBF production of a heavy Higgs boson as a function of its mass, combining $\ell\ell qq$ and $\nu\nu qq$ searches.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma\times$BR($W'\to ZW$) at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV for Drell-Yan production of a $W'$ boson in the HVT model as a function of its mass, combining $\ell\ell qq$ and $\nu\nu qq$ searches.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma\times$BR($W'\to ZW$) at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV for VBF production of a $W'$ boson in the HVT model as a function of its mass, combining $\ell\ell qq$ and $\nu\nu qq$ searches.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma\times$BR($G_{\mathrm{KK}}\to ZZ$) at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV for the production of a bulk RS graviton with couplings of $k/\overline{M}_{\mathrm{Pl}}=1$.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma\times$BR($G_{\mathrm{KK}}\to ZZ$) at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV for the production of a bulk RS graviton with couplings of $k/\overline{M}_{\mathrm{Pl}}=0.5$.
A search for the supersymmetric partners of the Standard Model bottom and top quarks is presented. The search uses 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. Direct production of pairs of bottom and top squarks ($\tilde{b}_{1}$ and $\tilde{t}_{1}$) is searched for in final states with $b$-tagged jets and missing transverse momentum. Distinctive selections are defined with either no charged leptons (electrons or muons) in the final state, or one charged lepton. The zero-lepton selection targets models in which the $\tilde{b}_{1}$ is the lightest squark and decays via $\tilde{b}_{1} \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$, where $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ is the lightest neutralino. The one-lepton final state targets models where bottom or top squarks are produced and can decay into multiple channels, $\tilde{b}_{1} \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{b}_{1} \rightarrow t \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}$, or $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow t \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}$, where $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}$ is the lightest chargino and the mass difference $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}}- m_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ is set to 1 GeV. No excess above the expected Standard Model background is observed. Exclusion limits at 95\% confidence level on the mass of third-generation squarks are derived in various supersymmetry-inspired simplified models.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <br/><b>Acceptance:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance1">b0L-SRA350</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance2">b0L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance3">b0L-SRA550</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance4">b0L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance5">b0L-SRC</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance6">b0L-best</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance7">b1L-SRA300-2j</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance8">b1L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance9">b1L-SRA600</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance10">b1L-SRA750</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance11">b1L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance12">b1L-best</a><br/><br/><b>Efficiency:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency1">b0L-SRA350</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency2">b0L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency3">b0L-SRA550</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency4">b0L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency5">b0L-SRC</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency6">b0L-best</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency7">b1L-SRA300-2j</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency8">b1L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency9">b1L-SRA600</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency10">b1L-SRA750</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency11">b1L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency12">b1L-best</a><br/><br/><b>Best SR Mapping:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=BestSR4">b0L</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=BestSR1">b1L</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=BestSR2">b0L</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=BestSR3">combined</a><br/><br/><b>Exclusion Contour:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> b0L-SRA350 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour1">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour2">obs</a> b0L-SRA450 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour5">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour6">obs</a> b0L-SRA550 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour9">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour10">obs</a> b0L-SRB <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour11">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour12">obs</a> b0L-SRC <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour15">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour16">obs</a> b0L-best <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour17">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour18">obs</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> b0L-SRA350 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour3">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour4">obs</a> b0L-SRA450 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour7">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour8">obs</a> b0L-SRB <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour13">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour14">obs</a> b0L-best <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour19">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour20">obs</a> b1L-SRA300-2j <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour21">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour22">obs</a> b1L-SRA450 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour23">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour24">obs</a> b1L-SRA600 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour25">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour26">obs</a> b1L-SRA750 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour27">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour28">obs</a> b1L-SRB <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour29">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour30">obs</a> b1L-best <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour31">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour32">obs</a> A-LowMass <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour33">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour34">obs</a> A-HighMass <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour35">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour36">obs</a> B combination <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour37">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour38">obs</a> Best combination <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour39">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour40">obs</a><br/><br/><b>SR Distribution:</b><br/><a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution1">b0L-SRA</a>: $m_{\mathrm{CT}}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution2">b0L-SRB</a>: $\mathrm{min[m_{T}(jet_{1-4}, E_{T}^{miss})]}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution3">b0L-SRC</a>: ${\cal A}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution4">b1L-SRA300-2j</a>: $\mathrm{m_{bb}}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution5">b1L-SRA</a>: $\mathrm{m_{eff}}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution6">b1L-SRB</a>: $\mathrm{m_{T}}$<br/><br/><b>Cross section upper limit:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection1">b0L-best</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection2">b0L-SRA350</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection3">b0L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection4">b0L-SRA550</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection5">b0L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection6">b0L-SRC</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection7">b0L-best</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection8">b0L-SRA350</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection9">b0L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection10">b0L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection11">b1L-best</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection12">b1L-SRA300-2j</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection13">b1L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection14">b1L-SRA600</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection15">b1L-SRA750</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection16">b1L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection17">best combination</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection18">A-LowMass</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection19">A-HighMass</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection20">B combination</a><br/><br/><b>Cutflow:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable1">b0L-SRA (1 TeV, 1 GeV)</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable2">b0L-SRB (700 GeV, 450 GeV)</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable3">b0L-SRC (450 GeV, 430 GeV)</a><br/><i>mixed:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable4">b1L-SRA (700 GeV, 300 GeV)</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable5">b1L-SRA300-2j (700 GeV, 300 GeV)</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable6">b0L-SRA (700 GeV, 300 GeV)</a><br/><br/><b>Truth Code</b> and <b>SLHA Files</b> for the cutflows are available under "Resources" (purple button on the left)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <br/><b>Acceptance:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance1">b0L-SRA350</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance2">b0L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance3">b0L-SRA550</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance4">b0L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance5">b0L-SRC</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance6">b0L-best</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance7">b1L-SRA300-2j</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance8">b1L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance9">b1L-SRA600</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance10">b1L-SRA750</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance11">b1L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Acceptance12">b1L-best</a><br/><br/><b>Efficiency:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency1">b0L-SRA350</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency2">b0L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency3">b0L-SRA550</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency4">b0L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency5">b0L-SRC</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency6">b0L-best</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency7">b1L-SRA300-2j</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency8">b1L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency9">b1L-SRA600</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency10">b1L-SRA750</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency11">b1L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Efficiency12">b1L-best</a><br/><br/><b>Best SR Mapping:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=BestSR4">b0L</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=BestSR1">b1L</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=BestSR2">b0L</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=BestSR3">combined</a><br/><br/><b>Exclusion Contour:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> b0L-SRA350 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour1">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour2">obs</a> b0L-SRA450 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour5">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour6">obs</a> b0L-SRA550 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour9">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour10">obs</a> b0L-SRB <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour11">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour12">obs</a> b0L-SRC <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour15">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour16">obs</a> b0L-best <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour17">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour18">obs</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> b0L-SRA350 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour3">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour4">obs</a> b0L-SRA450 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour7">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour8">obs</a> b0L-SRB <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour13">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour14">obs</a> b0L-best <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour19">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour20">obs</a> b1L-SRA300-2j <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour21">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour22">obs</a> b1L-SRA450 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour23">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour24">obs</a> b1L-SRA600 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour25">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour26">obs</a> b1L-SRA750 <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour27">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour28">obs</a> b1L-SRB <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour29">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour30">obs</a> b1L-best <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour31">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour32">obs</a> A-LowMass <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour33">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour34">obs</a> A-HighMass <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour35">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour36">obs</a> B combination <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour37">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour38">obs</a> Best combination <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour39">exp</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Contour40">obs</a><br/><br/><b>SR Distribution:</b><br/><a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution1">b0L-SRA</a>: $m_{\mathrm{CT}}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution2">b0L-SRB</a>: $\mathrm{min[m_{T}(jet_{1-4}, E_{T}^{miss})]}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution3">b0L-SRC</a>: ${\cal A}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution4">b1L-SRA300-2j</a>: $\mathrm{m_{bb}}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution5">b1L-SRA</a>: $\mathrm{m_{eff}}$ <a href="79165?version=1&table=SRdistribution6">b1L-SRB</a>: $\mathrm{m_{T}}$<br/><br/><b>Cross section upper limit:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection1">b0L-best</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection2">b0L-SRA350</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection3">b0L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection4">b0L-SRA550</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection5">b0L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection6">b0L-SRC</a><br/><i>asymmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection7">b0L-best</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection8">b0L-SRA350</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection9">b0L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection10">b0L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection11">b1L-best</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection12">b1L-SRA300-2j</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection13">b1L-SRA450</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection14">b1L-SRA600</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection15">b1L-SRA750</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection16">b1L-SRB</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection17">best combination</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection18">A-LowMass</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection19">A-HighMass</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=Limitoncrosssection20">B combination</a><br/><br/><b>Cutflow:</b><br/><i>symmetric:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable1">b0L-SRA (1 TeV, 1 GeV)</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable2">b0L-SRB (700 GeV, 450 GeV)</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable3">b0L-SRC (450 GeV, 430 GeV)</a><br/><i>mixed:</i> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable4">b1L-SRA (700 GeV, 300 GeV)</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable5">b1L-SRA300-2j (700 GeV, 300 GeV)</a> <a href="79165?version=1&table=CutflowTable6">b0L-SRA (700 GeV, 300 GeV)</a><br/><br/><b>Truth Code</b> and <b>SLHA Files</b> for the cutflows are available under "Resources" (purple button on the left)
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA350 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA350 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA450 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA450 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA550 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA550 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRB signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRB signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRC signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRC signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L- best expected signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L- best expected signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA300-2j signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA300-2j signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA450 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA450 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA600 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA600 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA750 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA750 signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRB signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRB signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L- best expected signal region.
Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L- best expected signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA350 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA350 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA450 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA450 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA550 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA550 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRB signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRB signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRC signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRC signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L- best expected signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L- best expected signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA300-2j signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA300-2j signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA450 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA450 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA600 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA600 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA750 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA750 signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRB signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRB signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L- best expected signal region.
Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L- best expected signal region.
b1L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.
b1L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.
b0L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.
b0L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.
combined signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.
combined signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.
b0L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino.
b0L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA550 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA550 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA550 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA550 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRC for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRC for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRC for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRC for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Observed exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.
Expected exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA300-2j for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA300-2j for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA300-2j for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA300-2j for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA600 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA600 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA600 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA600 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA750 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA750 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA750 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA750 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for best b1L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for best b1L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for best b1L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for best b1L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for A-LowMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for A-LowMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for A-LowMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for A-LowMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for A-HighMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for A-HighMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for A-HighMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for A-HighMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for B combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for B combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for B combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for B combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for best combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Expected exclusion limit for best combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for best combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
Observed exclusion limit for best combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.
$m_{\mathrm{CT}}$ distribution in b0L-SRA. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$m_{\mathrm{CT}}$ distribution in b0L-SRA. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$\mathrm{min[m_{T}(jet_{1-4}, E_{T}^{miss})]}$ distribution in b0L-SRB. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$\mathrm{min[m_{T}(jet_{1-4}, E_{T}^{miss})]}$ distribution in b0L-SRB. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
${\cal A}$ distribution in b0L-SRC. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
${\cal A}$ distribution in b0L-SRC. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$\mathrm{m_{bb}}$ distribution in b1L-SRA300-2j. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$\mathrm{m_{bb}}$ distribution in b1L-SRA300-2j. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$\mathrm{m_{eff}}$ distribution in b1L-SRA. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$\mathrm{m_{eff}}$ distribution in b1L-SRA. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$\mathrm{m_{T}}$ distribution in b1L-SRB. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
$\mathrm{m_{T}}$ distribution in b1L-SRB. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b0L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b0L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA350 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA350 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA550 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA550 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRC as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRC as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b0L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b0L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA350 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA350 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b1L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b1L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA300-2j as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA300-2j as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA600 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA600 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA750 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA750 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for A-LowMass combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for A-LowMass combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for A-HighMass combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for A-HighMass combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for B combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cross section excluded at 95% CL for B combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.
Cutflow table in b0L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 1 TeV decaying into a 1 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b0L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 1 TeV decaying into a 1 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b0L-SRB for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 450 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b0L-SRB for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 450 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b0L-SRC for a pair produced bottom squark of 450 GeV decaying into a 430 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b0L-SRC for a pair produced bottom squark of 450 GeV decaying into a 430 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b1L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b1L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b1L-SRA300-2j for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b1L-SRA300-2j for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b0L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.
Cutflow table in b0L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.
The results of a search for squarks and gluinos in final states with an isolated electron or muon, multiple jets and large missing transverse momentum using proton--proton collision data at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV are presented. The dataset used was recorded during 2015 and 2016 by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider and corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 $fb^{-1}$. No significant excess beyond the expected background is found. Exclusion limits at 95% confidence level are set in a number of supersymmetric scenarios, reaching masses up to 2.1 TeV for gluino pair production and up to 1.25 TeV for squark pair production.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step variable-x model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step variable-x model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step variable-x model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step variable-x model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step variable-x model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step variable-x model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step variable-x model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step variable-x model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino two-step model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino two-step model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino two-step model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino two-step model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for pMSSM model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for pMSSM model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for pMSSM model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for pMSSM model.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 2J b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 2J b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J low-x b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J low-x b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J high-x b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J high-x b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 6J b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 6J b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 2J b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 2J b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J low-x b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J low-x b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J high-x b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J high-x b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 6J b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 6J b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 9J signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 9J signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 9J signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 9J signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for squark one-step variable-x model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for squark one-step variable-x model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino two-step model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino two-step model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for pMSSM model.
Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for pMSSM model.
Acceptance in 2J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Acceptance in 2J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Acceptance in 2J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Acceptance in 2J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Acceptance in 4J low-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Acceptance in 4J low-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Acceptance in 4J low-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.
Acceptance in 4J low-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.
Acceptance in 4J high-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Acceptance in 4J high-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Acceptance in 4J high-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.
Acceptance in 4J high-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.
Acceptance in 6J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Acceptance in 6J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Acceptance in 6J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Acceptance in 6J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Acceptance in 9J discovery signal region for pMSSM model.
Acceptance in 9J discovery signal region for pMSSM model.
Acceptance in 9J discovery signal region for gluino two-step model.
Acceptance in 9J discovery signal region for gluino two-step model.
Efficiency in 2J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Efficiency in 2J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Efficiency in 2J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Efficiency in 2J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Efficiency in 4J low-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Efficiency in 4J low-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Efficiency in 4J low-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.
Efficiency in 4J low-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.
Efficiency in 4J high-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Efficiency in 4J high-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.
Efficiency in 4J high-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.
Efficiency in 4J high-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.
Efficiency in 6J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Efficiency in 6J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.
Efficiency in 6J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Efficiency in 6J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.
Efficiency in 9J discovery signal region for pMSSM model.
Efficiency in 9J discovery signal region for pMSSM model.
Efficiency in 9J discovery signal region for gluino two-step model.
Efficiency in 9J discovery signal region for gluino two-step model.
Cutflow table for the 2J discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 2J discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 4J high-x discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 4J high-x discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 4J low-x discovery signal region (targetting gluino decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 4J low-x discovery signal region (targetting gluino decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 4J low-x discovery signal region (targetting squark decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 4J low-x discovery signal region (targetting squark decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 6J discovery signal region (targetting gluino decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 6J discovery signal region (targetting gluino decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 6J discovery signal region (targetting squark decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 6J discovery signal region (targetting squark decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 9J discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
Cutflow table for the 9J discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But, sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance and examples on the query string syntax can be found in the Elasticsearch documentation.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status
Email
Forum
Twitter
GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.