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.

Correlation coefficients $\rho_{i,j}$ for the statistical and systematic uncertainties between the $i$-th and $j$-th bin of the differential $A_E$ measurement as a function of the jet scattering angle $\theta_j$

The effects on the energy asymmetry of $1\sigma$ variations in its influencing nuisance parameters for the three $\theta_j$ bins. These are extracted from the samples of the posterior distribution with $\sigma_i^{(j)} = c_{ij}/\sqrt{c_{jj}}$ being the estimated shift of bin $i$ in conjunction with a shift $\Delta\theta_j$ of nuisance parameter $j$. The data statistical (Data stat.) uncertainty is obtained from running the unfolding with all nuisance parameters being fixed to their post-marginalised values, the MC statistical uncertainty on the response matrix ($t\bar{t}$ response MC stat.) is evaluated using a bootstrapping method from the covariance matrix of the ensemble of repeated unfolding results with varied response matrices. The $\gamma$ variations denote the statistical uncertainties of the background predictions in the corresponding bin of the $\Delta E$ vs $\theta_{j}$ distribution. The numbers appended to the $W$+jets PDF variations denote the corresponding NNPDF3.0 PDF sets.

The effects on the energy asymmetry of $1\sigma$ variations in its influencing nuisance parameters for the three $\theta_j$ bins. These are extracted from the samples of the posterior distribution with $\sigma_i^{(j)} = c_{ij}/\sqrt{c_{jj}}$ being the estimated shift of bin $i$ in conjunction with a shift $\Delta\theta_j$ of nuisance parameter $j$. The data statistical (Data stat.) uncertainty is obtained from running the unfolding with all nuisance parameters being fixed to their post-marginalised values, the MC statistical uncertainty on the response matrix ($t\bar{t}$ response MC stat.) is evaluated using a bootstrapping method from the covariance matrix of the ensemble of repeated unfolding results with varied response matrices. The $\gamma$ variations denote the statistical uncertainties of the background predictions in the corresponding bin of the $\Delta E$ vs $\theta_{j}$ distribution. The numbers appended to the $W$+jets PDF variations denote the corresponding NNPDF3.0 PDF sets.

Covariances $c_{ij}$ for the highest ranked systematic uncertainties in the energy asymmetry measurement differential in $\theta_j$.

Covariances $c_{ij}$ for the highest ranked systematic uncertainties in the energy asymmetry measurement differential in $\theta_j$.

Definition of the fiducial phase space with lepton candidate ($\ell$), hadronic top candidate ($j_h$), leptonic top candidate ($j_l$) and associated jet candidate ($j_a$).

Definition of the fiducial phase space with lepton candidate ($\ell$), hadronic top candidate ($j_h$), leptonic top candidate ($j_l$) and associated jet candidate ($j_a$).

Bounds on individual Wilson coefficients $C($TeV$/\Lambda)^2$ from the energy asymmetry, obtained from a combined fit to its values in all three $\theta_j$ bins.

Bounds on individual Wilson coefficients $C($TeV$/\Lambda)^2$ from the energy asymmetry, obtained from a combined fit to its values in all three $\theta_j$ bins.

Light quark ($uds$) Collins asymmetries obtained by fitting the U/L and U/C double ratios as a function of ($z_1$,$z_2$) for $K\pi$ hadron pairs. In the first column, the $z$ bins and their respective mean values for the hadron ($K$ or $\pi$) in one hemisphere are reported; in the following column, the same variables for the second hadron ($K$ or $\pi$) are shown; in the third column the mean value of $\sin^2\theta_{2}/(1+\cos^2\theta_{2})$ is summarized, calculated in the RF0 frame; in the last two columns the asymmetry results are summarized. The mean values of the quantities reported in the table are calculated by summing the corresponding values for each $K\pi$ pair and dividing by the number of $K\pi$ pairs that fall into each ($z_1$,$z_2$) interval. Note that the $A^{UL}$ and $A^{UC}$ results are strongly correlated since they are obtained by using the same data set.

Light quark ($uds$) Collins asymmetries obtained by fitting the U/L and U/C double ratios as a function of ($z_1$,$z_2$) for pion pairs. In the first column, the $z$ bins and their respective mean values for the pion in one hemisphere are reported; in the following column, the same variables for the second pion are shown; in the third column the mean value of $\sin^2\theta_{th}/(1+\cos^2\theta_{th})$ is summarized, calculated in the RF12 frame; in the last two columns the asymmetry results are summarized. The mean values of the quantities reported in the table are calculated by summing the corresponding values for each $\pi\pi$ pair and dividing by the number of $\pi\pi$ pairs that fall into each ($z_1$,$z_2$) interval. Note that the $A^{UL}$ and $A^{UC}$ results are strongly correlated since they are obtained by using the same data set.

Light quark ($uds$) Collins asymmetries obtained by fitting the U/L and U/C double ratios as a function of ($z_1$,$z_2$) for pion pairs. In the first column, the $z$ bins and their respective mean values for the pion in one hemisphere are reported; in the following column, the same variables for the second pion are shown; in the third column the mean value of $\sin^2\theta_{2}/(1+\cos^2\theta_{2})$ is summarized, calculated in the RF0 frame; in the last two columns the asymmetry results are summarized. The mean values of the quantities reported in the table are calculated by summing the corresponding values for each $\pi\pi$ pair and dividing by the number of $\pi\pi$ pairs that fall into each ($z_1$,$z_2$) interval. Note that the $A^{UL}$ and $A^{UC}$ results are strongly correlated since they are obtained by using the same data set.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, VM subtracted, Not VM subtracted.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, VM subtracted, Not VM subtracted.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, VM subtracted, Not VM subtracted.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, VM subtracted, Not VM subtracted.

pi+ target asymmetries from HERMES, VM subtracted.

pi- target asymmetries from HERMES, VM subtracted.

K+ target asymmetries from HERMES, VM subtracted.

K- target asymmetries from HERMES, VM subtracted.

pi+ target asymmetries from HERMES, pi- target asymmetries from HERMES, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

pi+ target asymmetries from HERMES, pi- target asymmetries from HERMES, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

pi+ target asymmetries from HERMES, pi- target asymmetries from HERMES, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

pi+ target asymmetries from HERMES, pi- target asymmetries from HERMES, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

pi+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

pi- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

K+ multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.2-0.3.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.3-0.4.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.4-0.6.

K- multiplicities from HERMES, Target: H, Target: D, VM subtracted, Z in the range 0.6-0.8.

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The differential cross section as a function of PHI, the angle between the positron scattering plane and the proton scattering plane for the LRG and the LPS data samples.

The azimuthal asymmetries ALT and ATT as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The azimuthal asymmetries ALT and ATT as a function of BETA.

The azimuthal asymmetries ALT and ATT as a function of ABS(T).

The azimuthal asymmetries ALT and ATT as a function of Q**2.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 2.5 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 3.9 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 7.1 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 14 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 40 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 2.5 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 3.9 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 7.1 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 14 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 40 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 2.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 3.9 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 7.1 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 14 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 40 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 2.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 3.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 4.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 5.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 6.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 8.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 12 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 16 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 22 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 30 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 40 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 50 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 65 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 85 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 140 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 185 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 255 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

Beam SSA as a function of Z, X, hadronic PT and Q**2 corrected for the decay of exclusively produced VMs with the DSYS error due to the uncertainty in the VM subtraction.

Beam SSA as a function of Z, X, hadronic PT and Q**2 corrected for the decay of exclusively produced VMs with the DSYS error due to the uncertainty in the VM subtraction.

Beam SSA as a function of Z, X, hadronic PT and Q**2 corrected for the decay of exclusively produced VMs with the DSYS error due to the uncertainty in the VM subtraction.

Differential K0S cross section in DIS events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Differential K0S cross section in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 from 5 to 25 GeV**2.

Differential K0S cross section in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Differential K0S cross section in DIS events as a function of Q**2. for Q**2 > 5 GeV**2.

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in DIS events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for Q**2 from 5 to 25 GeV**2.

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in DIS events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in DIS events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for Q**2 from 5 to 25 GeV**2.

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in DIS events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in DIS eventsas a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 from 5 to 25 GeV**2.

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in DIS eventsas a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in DIS events as a function of Q**2. for Q**2 > 5 GeV**2.

Differential K0S cross section in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab).

Differential K0S cross section in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab).

Differential K0S cross section in photoproduction events as a function of XOBS(C=GAMMA).

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab).

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab).

Differential LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR cross section in photoproduction events as a function of XOBS(C=GAMMA).

Asymmetry in LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR production in DIS events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Asymmetry in LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR production in DIS events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Asymmetry in LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR production in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Asymmetry in LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR production in DIS events as a function of Q**2. for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

Asymmetry in LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR production in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab).

Asymmetry in LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR production in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab).

Asymmetry in LAMBDA/LAMBDABAR production in photoproduction events as a function of XOBS(C=GAMMA).

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for Q**2 from 5 to 25 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for Q**2 from 5 to 25 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 from 5 to 25 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Q**2. for Q**2 > 5 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Q**2. for Bjorken X from 2.0E-5 to 3.0E-4.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Q**2. for Bjorken X from 3.0E-4 to 6.0E-4.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Q**2. for Bjorken X from 6.0E-4 to 1.4E-3.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Q**2. for Bjorken X from 1.4E-3 to 2.0E-2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 from 5.0 to 9.5 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 from 9.5 to 25.0 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 from 25 to 100 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in DIS events as a function of Bjorken X. for Q**2 from 100 to 500 GeV**2.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab).

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab).

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of XOBS(C=GAMMA).

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for data from the fireball-enriched sample where the highest energy jet contributes no more than 30% to the total energy.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for data from the fireball-depleted sample where the highest energy jet contributes at least 30% to the total energy.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for data from the fireball-enriched sample where the highest energy jet contributes no more than 30% to the total energy.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for data from the fireball-depleted sample where the highest energy jet contributes at least 30% to the total energy.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of XOBS(C=GAMMA). for data from the fireball-enriched sample where the highest energy jet contributes no more than 30% to the total energy.

LAMBDA/K0S production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of XOBS(C=GAMMA). for data from the fireball-depleted sample where the highest energy jet contributes at least 30% to the total energy.

K0S/Charged particle production ratio in DIS events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

K0S/Charged particle production ratio in DIS events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for Q**2 > 25 GeV**2.

K0S/Charged particle production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab).

K0S/Charged particle production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab).

K0S/Charged particle production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for data from the fireball-enriched sample where the highest energy jet contributes no more than 30% to the total energy.

K0S/Charged particle production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of transverse momentum (lab). for data from the fireball-depleted sample where the highest energy jet contributes at least 30% to the total energy.

K0S/Charged particle production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for data from the fireball-enriched sample where the highest energy jet contributes no more than 30% to the total energy.

K0S/Charged particle production ratio in photoproduction events as a function of pseudorapidity (lab). for data from the fireball-depleted sample where the highest energy jet contributes at least 30% to the total energy.

Integrals of G1 over different X ranges for DEUT target at various Q*2 values. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD).. The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2. Axis error includes +- 5.0/5.0 contribution.

Integrals of G1 over different X ranges for N target at various Q*2 values. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD).. The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2.

Integral of G1 for the Non-Singet contribution. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD).. The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2. Axis error includes +- 5.2/5.2 contribution.

The measured and Born asymmetries for the proton target at the average values of the average values of X, Y,and Q**2 in 45 bins. DSYS includes the 5.2 PCT normalization uncertainty.

The measured and Born asymmetries for the deuterium target at the average values of the average values of X, Y,and Q**2 in 45 bins. DSYS includes the 5 PCT normalization uncertainty.

Virtual photon asymmetries A1 for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 45 bins. The first DSYS is the experimental uncertainty and includes the 5.2 (5.0) PCT normalization uncertainty for the proton (deuteron) data. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD).

Structure functions G1 for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 45 bins. The first DSYS is the experimental uncertainty and includes the 5.2 (5.0) PCT normalization uncertainty for the proton (deuteron) data. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD).

Virtual photon asymmetries A1 for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 19 bins. The first DSYS is the experimental uncertainty and includes the 5.2 (5.0) PCT normalization uncertainty for the proton (deuteron) data. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD). The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2.

Structure functions G1 for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 19 bins. The first DSYS is the experimental uncertainty and includes the 5.2 (5.0) PCT normalization uncertainty for the proton (deuteron) data. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD). The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2.

Structure functions G1 for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 15 bins. The first DSYS is the experimental uncertainty and includes the 5.2 (5.0) PCT normalization uncertainty for the proton (deuteron) data. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD). The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2.

Virtual photon asymmetries A1 for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 15 bins. The first DSYS is the experimental uncertainty and includes the 5.2 (5.0) PCT normalization uncertainty for the proton (deuteron) data. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD). The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2.

Structure functions G1(n) and G1(NS)for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 45 bins. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD).

Structure functions G1(n) and G1(NS)for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 19 bins. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD). The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2.

Structure functions G1(n) and G1(NS)for the proton and deuterium targets at the average values of X,and Q**2 in 15 bins. The second DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in the parameterizations (R, F2, A2, Azz, omegaD). The third DSYS systematic error is due to the uncertainty in evolving to a common Q**2.

Correlation matrix for the Asymmetry, A1 and G1 for the P target at the average values of X and Q**2 in 45 bins.

Correlation matrix for the Asymmetry, A1 and G1 for the DEUT target at the average values of X and Q**2 in 45 bins.

Correlation matrix for G1 for the P target in 19 X bins (averaged over Q**2).

Correlation matrix for G1 for the DEUT target in 19 X bins (averaged over Q**2).

Correlation matrix for G1 for the P target in 15 X bins (Q**2 > 1 GeV**2), averaged over Q**2.

Correlation matrix for G1 for the DEUT target in 15 X bins (Q**2 > 1 GeV**2), averaged over Q**2.