Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p_T-leading TAR jet passes the m_Wcand and D₂^β=1 requirements, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=2100 GeV, with the preselections applied.

Probability of finding a W_had candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=500 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.

Probability of finding a W_had candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=1000 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.

Probability of finding a W_had candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=1700 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.

Probability of finding a W_had candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=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_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected+1σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected-1σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected+2σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected-2σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) for m_Z'=0.5 TeV as a function of m_s. 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^± W^∓) process for m_Z'=0.5 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) for m_Z'=1 TeV as a function of m_s. 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^± W^∓) process for m_Z'=1 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) for m_Z'=1.7 TeV as a function of m_s. 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^± W^∓) process for m_Z'=1.7 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) for m_Z'=2.1 TeV as a function of m_s. 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^± W^∓) process for m_Z'=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_q=0.25, g_χ=1.0, sinθ=0.01 and m_χ=200 GeV are considered, which are indicated using the (m_Z', m_s) format in units of GeV in the table columns.

Cumulative efficiencies in the merged category for three representative dark Higgs signal scenarios with g_q=0.25, g_χ=1.0, sinθ=0.01, m_Z' = 1 TeV, and m_χ=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_q=0.25, g_χ=1.0, sinθ=0.01, m_Z' = 1 TeV, and m_χ=200 GeV considering s→W(ℓν)W(qq) decays only.

Theoretical cross section for &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m_Z′ ={300, 350, 400, 500, 750} GeV, with g_q = 0.25, g<sub>&chi; = 1.0, sin&theta; = 0.01, m_Z′ = 1 TeV , and m_&chi; = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (&plusmn;1&sigma;).

Theoretical cross section for &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m_Z′ ={1000, 1700} GeV, with g_q = 0.25, g<sub>&chi; = 1.0, sin&theta; = 0.01, m_Z′ = 1 TeV , and m_&chi; = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (&plusmn;1&sigma;).

Theoretical cross section for &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m_Z′ ={2100, 2500, 2900, 3300} GeV, with g_q = 0.25, g<sub>&chi; = 1.0, sin&theta; = 0.01, m_Z′ = 1 TeV , and m_&chi; = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (&plusmn;1&sigma;).

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.

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.).

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.

Number of data events (20.3 fb$^{-1}$), number of predicted events from the fit, statistical uncertainty on the fit, systematic uncertainty on the choice of control region, and on the choice of fit function versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ lower bin edge for inclusive jet multiplicity $N_{\textrm{Jet}} \geq 6$. The total uncertainty is obtained by adding the three uncertainties linearly.

Number of data events (20.3 fb$^{-1}$), number of predicted events from the fit, statistical uncertainty on the fit, systematic uncertainty on the choice of control region, and on the choice of fit function versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ lower bin edge for inclusive jet multiplicity $N_{\textrm{Jet}} \geq 7$. The total uncertainty is obtained by adding the three uncertainties linearly.

Number of data events (20.3 fb$^{-1}$), number of predicted events from the fit, statistical uncertainty on the fit, systematic uncertainty on the choice of control region, and on the choice of fit function versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ lower bin edge for inclusive jet multiplicity $N_{\textrm{Jet}} \geq 8$. The total uncertainty is obtained by adding the three uncertainties linearly.

Upper limits on the visible cross section (cross section ($\sigma$) times acceptance ($A$) times efficiency ($\epsilon$)) at the 95% CL versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ for $N_{\textrm{Jet}}\geq 3$.

Upper limits on the visible cross section (cross section ($\sigma$) times acceptance ($A$) times efficiency ($\epsilon$)) at the 95% CL versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ for $N_{\textrm{Jet}}\geq 4$.

Upper limits on the visible cross section (cross section ($\sigma$) times acceptance ($A$) times efficiency ($\epsilon$)) at the 95% CL versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ for $N_{\textrm{Jet}}\geq 5$.

Upper limits on the visible cross section (cross section ($\sigma$) times acceptance ($A$) times efficiency ($\epsilon$)) at the 95% CL versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ for $N_{\textrm{Jet}}\geq 6$.

Upper limits on the visible cross section (cross section ($\sigma$) times acceptance ($A$) times efficiency ($\epsilon$)) at the 95% CL versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ for $N_{\textrm{Jet}}\geq 7$.

Upper limits on the visible cross section (cross section ($\sigma$) times acceptance ($A$) times efficiency ($\epsilon$)) at the 95% CL versus inclusive $H_{\textrm{T}}^{\textrm{min}}$ for $N_{\textrm{Jet}}\geq 8$.

Mean reconstruction efficiencies $(\epsilon)$ and RMS of the reconstruction efficiencies for various black hole and string ball models.

mjj region 1600 - 2000 GeV. The observed systematic is the experimental uncertainty, while the SM prediction systematic is the theoretical uncertainty.

mjj region 2000 - 2600 GeV. The observed systematic is the experimental uncertainty, while the SM prediction systematic is the theoretical uncertainty.

mjj region 2600 - 3200 GeV. The observed systematic is the experimental uncertainty, while the SM prediction systematic is the theoretical uncertainty.

mjj region 3200 - 8000 GeV. The observed systematic is the experimental uncertainty, while the SM prediction systematic is the theoretical uncertainty.

Observed limits on the pair production cross section as a function of mass for vector-like B quarks. These limits assume branching ratios given by the model where the B quark exists as a singlet.

Observed limits on the pair production cross section as a function of mass for vector-like T quarks. These limits assume branching ratios given by the model where the T quark exists as a singlet.

Expected and observed cross section limits as a function of mass on T_5/3 pair production.

Expected and observed cross section limits as a function of mass on T_5/3 pair production plus single production for $\lambda = 0.5$.

Expected and observed cross section limits as a function of mass on T_5/3 pair production plus single production for $\lambda = 1.0$.

Expected and observed limits for the sgluon pair-production cross section times branching ratio to four top quarks as a function of the sgluon mass.

Expected and observed limits on the four- top-quark production rate for the 2UED/RPP model in the symmetric case. The theory line corresponds to the production of four-top-quark events by tier (1, 1) with a branching ratio of A^(1,1) to tttt of 100%.

The observed and expected $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the dimuon SR-Z. The negigible estimated contribution from Z+jets is omitted in these distributions. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dielectron invariant mass distribution in SR-loose. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dimuon invariant mass distribution in SR-loose. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dielectron invariant mass distribution in the two-jet $b$-veto SR. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dimuon invariant mass distribution in the two-jet $b$-veto SR. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dielectron invariant mass distribution in the four jet b-veto SR. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dimuon invariant mass distribution in the four-jet $b$-veto SR. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dielectron invariant mass distribution in the two-jet $b$-tag SR. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dimuon invariant mass distribution in two-jet $b$-tag SR. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dielectron invariant mass distribution in the four-jet $b$-tag SR. The last bin contains the overflow.

The observed and expected dimuon invariant mass distribution in the four-jet $b$-tag SR. The last bin contains the overflow.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$ in SR-Z.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$ in SR-Z.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$ in SR-Z.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$ in SR-Z.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons in the two-jet $b$-veto SR.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons in the two-jet $b$-veto SR.

Expected 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons in the four-jet $b$-veto SR.

Observed 95% exclusion contour for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons in the four-jet $b$-veto SR.

Number of generated events in the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons.

Production cross-section in the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons.

Number of generated events in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Production cross-section in the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Number of generated events in the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$.

Production cross-section in the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$.

Number of generated events in the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$.

Production cross-section in the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$.

Total experimental uncertainty [%] for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons.

Total experimental uncertainty [%] for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$.

Total experimental uncertainty for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$.

Signal acceptance for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$ in the combined electron and muon SR-Z.

Signal acceptance for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$ in the combined electron and muon SR-Z.

Signal efficiency for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$ in the dielectron SR-Z.

Signal efficiency for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$ in the dielectron SR-Z.

Signal efficiency for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$ in the dimuon SR-Z.

Signal efficiency for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$ in the dimuon SR-Z.

Signal efficiency for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$ in the electron and muon combined SR-Z.

Signal efficiency for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$ in the the electron and muon combined SR-Z.

Signal acceptance for the two-step first- and second-generation squarks simplified model with sleptons in the two-jet $b$-veto SR.

Signal acceptance for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons in the four-jet $b$-veto SR.

Signal efficiency for the two-step first- and second-generation squarks simplified model with sleptons in the two-jet $b$-veto SR.

Signal efficiency for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons in the four-jet $b$-veto SR.

Upper limits on the signal cross-section at 95% CL for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$.

Observed CL$_{\text{S}}$ for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$.

Expected CL$_{\text{S}}$ for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=1.5$.

Upper limits on the signal cross-section at 95% CL for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$.

Observed CL$_{\text{S}}$ for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$.

Expected CL$_{\text{S}}$ for the GGM model with $\tan(\beta)=30$.

Upper limits on the signal stength at 95% CL for the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons. The excluded signal strength is defined as the ratio of the observed excluded production cross section to the expected production cross section calculated at NLO+NLL.

Upper limits on the signal stength at 95% CL for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons. The excluded signal strength is defined as the ratio of the observed excluded production cross section to the expected production cross section calculated at NLO+NLL.

Observed CL$_{\text{S}}$ for the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Expected CL$_{\text{S}}$ for the two-step first- and second-generation squark simplified model with sleptons.

Observed CL$_{\text{S}}$ for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons.

Expected CL$_{\text{S}}$ for the two-step gluino simplified model with sleptons.

Cutflow table for three benchmark signal points in SR-Z for the $ee$ and $\mu\mu$ channels separately. The three signal points are taken from the $\tan\beta = 1.5$ grid. 100000 events were generated for each of these points. Shown here are both the unweighted number of events and the number of events normalised to 20.3 fb$^{-1}$. The total experimental systematic uncertainty on the signal yields is indicated at the last cut, along with the corresponding observed and expected $CL_S$ values.

Cutflow table for three benchmark signal points in the two jet b-veto SR of the off-$Z$ search for the $ee$ and $\mu\mu$ channels separately. Shown here are both the unweighted number of events and the number of events normalised to 20.3$^{-1}$. Except for the last two rows indicating the dilepton mass requirements, quoted event yields include all requirements from the top of the table down to the given row.

Cutflow table for three benchmark signal points in the four jet b-veto SR of the off-$Z$ search for the $ee$ and $\mu\mu$ channels separately. Shown here are both the unweighted number of events and the number of events normalised to 20.3 fb$^{-1}$. Except for the last two rows indicating the dilepton mass requirements, quoted event yields include all requirements from the top of the table down to the given row.

Ratio of the Z'NU to Z'SSM acceptance times efficiency (ACC*EFF) in the lep-had channel as a function of sin^2phi and the Z' mass.

Z' SSM acceptance (ACC) and product of acceptance and efficiency (ACC*EFF) for the had-had and lep-had selections as a function of the Z' mass.

Number of expected Z'SSM signal (NS), background (NB) and observed (N) events passing the total transverse mass ($m_{\rm T}^{\rm tot}$) threshold in the had-had and lep-had channels.

Median expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction to tau+tau- for Z'SSM production for the exclusive had-had and lep-had channels, and for both channels combined.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction to tau+tau- for Z'L and Z'R production for the combination of the had-had and lep-had channels.

Observed 95% CL lower limit on the Z'NU mass as a function of sin^2(phi).

Distribution of $m_{{\rm T}2}(\ell, \tau_{\mathrm{had}})$ for events passing all the lepton-hadron HM signal region requirements, except that on the variable itself. The SM background process have been normalised using a fit to the data observed in CRs.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% CL in the (scalar top, scalar tau) mass plane from the combination of all selections.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% CL in the (scalar top, scalar tau) mass plane from the combination of all selections.

The region / analysis with the best expected upper limit on the signal cross-section (95% CL) as a function of the stop and stau masses. 1: SRLM, 2: SRHH, 3: two-lepton channel analysis, 5: SRHM.

The 95% CL excluded cross section times branching ratio, using the best expected SR / analysis for each mass point.

The cut flow on the raw generated events for the signal point (scalar top mass, scalar tau mass) = (337,148) GeV for the hadron-hadron SR. The production cross section for this signal point is $1.00 \pm 0.14$ pb. Quality Cuts indicate a set of cuts applied to ensure good quality events in data. A full description of the cuts used is given in the text. The original input file has a filter applied to it that ensures that all the events have $E_T^{miss}>60$ GeV or one electron or muon with $p_\mathrm{T} > 20$ GeV at truth level. After the filter is applied (efficiency = 0.883) there are 100000 events remaining.

The cut flow on the raw generated events for the signal point (scalar top mass, scalar tau mass) = (195,87) GeV for the lepton-hadron LM SR. The production cross section for this signal point is $21 \pm 3$ pb. Quality Cuts indicate a set of cuts applied to ensure good quality events in data. A full description of the cuts used is given in the text. The original input file has a filter applied to it that ensures that all the events have $E_T^{miss}<60$ GeV and one electron or muon with $p_\mathrm{T} > 20$ GeV at truth level. After the filter is applied (efficiency = 0.117) there are 50000 events remaining before applying the event weights.

The cut flow on the raw generated events for the signal point (scalar top mass, scalar tau mass) = (391,337) GeV for the lepton-hadron HM SR. The production cross section for this signal point is $0.41 \pm 0.06$ pb. Quality Cuts indicate a set of cuts applied to ensure good quality events in data. A full description of the cuts used is given in the text. The original input file has a filter applied to it that ensures that all the events have either $E_T^{miss}>150$ GeV or at least one electron or muon with $p_\mathrm{T} > 20$ GeV at truth level. After the filter is applied (efficiency = 0.925) there are 50000 events remaining before applying the event weights.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the Gbb signal.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the Gbb signal.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the Gtt combination.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the Gtt combination.

Acceptances for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-A. Acceptance is evaluated at truth level, with only leptons from heavy bosons and taus considered, and no further quality or isolation criteria applied in their selection.

Acceptances for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B. Acceptance is evaluated at truth level, with only leptons from heavy bosons and taus considered, and no further quality or isolation criteria applied in their selection.

Acceptances for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C. Acceptance is evaluated at truth level, with only leptons from heavy bosons and taus considered, and no further quality or isolation criteria applied in their selection.

Acceptances for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0L-A. Acceptance is evaluated at truth level, with only leptons from heavy bosons and taus considered, and no further quality or isolation criteria applied in their selection.

Acceptances for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0L-B. Acceptance is evaluated at truth level, with only leptons from heavy bosons and taus considered, and no further quality or isolation criteria applied in their selection.

Acceptances for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0L-C. Acceptance is evaluated at truth level, with only leptons from heavy bosons and taus considered, and no further quality or isolation criteria applied in their selection.

Acceptances for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1L-A. Acceptance is evaluated at truth level, with only leptons from heavy bosons and taus considered, and no further quality or isolation criteria applied in their selection.

Acceptances for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1L-B. Acceptance is evaluated at truth level, with only leptons from heavy bosons and taus considered, and no further quality or isolation criteria applied in their selection.

Acceptance times efficiency for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-A.

Acceptance times efficiency for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-B.

Acceptance times efficiency for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-C.

Acceptance times efficiency for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0L-A.

Acceptance times efficiency for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0L-B.

Acceptance times efficiency for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0L-C.

Acceptance times efficiency for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1L-A.

Acceptance times efficiency for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1L-B.

95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gbb model in SR-Gbb-A.

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-C.

95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-0L-A.

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-C.

95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1L-A.

95% CL upper limit on the cross-section times branching ratio (in fb) for the Gtt model in SR-Gtt-1L-B.

Signal region yielding the best expected sensitivity for each point of the parameter space in the Gbb model.

Signal region yielding the best expected sensitivity for each point of the parameter space in the Gtt model for the 0-lepton channel.

Signal region yielding the best expected sensitivity for each point of the parameter space in the Gtt model for the 1-lepton channel.

Combination of two 0-lepton and 1-lepton signal regions yielding the best expected sensitivity for each point of the parameter space in the Gtt model.

Measured integrated cross sections for the $Z\gamma\gamma$ process for neutrino final state at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV in the extended fiducial regions defined in the paper, table 5. The parton-to-particle correction factors are also shown, which are defined as the ratio of the cross sections at parton-level to the cross sections at particle-level.

The differential cross sections as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma$ process in the inclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ extended fiducial region. The parton-to-particle correction factors are also shown, which are defined as the ratio of the cross sections at parton-level to the cross sections at particle-level.

The differential cross sections as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma$ process in the exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ extended fiducial region. The parton-to-particle correction factors are also shown, which are defined as the ratio of the cross sections at parton-level to the cross sections at particle-level.

The differential cross sections as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \nu\bar{\nu}\gamma$ process in the inclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ extended fiducial region. The parton-to-particle correction factors are also shown, which are defined as the ratio of the cross sections at parton-level to the cross sections at particle-level.

The differential cross sections as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \nu\bar{\nu}\gamma$ process in the exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ extended fiducial region. The parton-to-particle correction factors are also shown, which are defined as the ratio of the cross sections at parton-level to the cross sections at particle-level.

The differential cross sections as a function of $m_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma$ process in the inclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ extended fiducial region. The parton-to-particle correction factors are also shown, which are defined as the ratio of the cross sections at parton-level to the cross sections at particle-level.

The differential cross sections as a function of $m_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma$ process in the exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ extended fiducial region. The parton-to-particle correction factors are also shown, which are defined as the ratio of the cross sections at parton-level to the cross sections at particle-level.

The cross sections as a function of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma$ process in the extended fiducial region. The parton-to-particle correction factors are also shown, which are defined as the ratio of the cross sections at parton-level to the cross sections at particle-level.

Summary of results for cross-section of non-prompt $J/\psi$ decaying to a muon pair for 8 TeV data in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of prompt $\psi(2S)$ decaying to a muon pair for 7 TeV data in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of prompt $\psi(2S)$ decaying to a muon pair for 8 TeV data 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 for 7 TeV data 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 for 8 TeV data in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt fraction of $J/\psi$ decaying to a muon pair as a percentage for 7 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt fraction of $J/\psi$ decaying to a muon pair as a percentage for 8 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt fraction of $\psi(2S)$ decaying to a muon pair as a percentage for 7 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt fraction of $\psi(2S)$ decaying to a muon pair as a percentage for 8 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for prompt $\psi(2S)$ over $J/\psi$ ratio as a percentage for 7 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for prompt $\psi(2S)$ over $J/\psi$ ratio as a percentage for 8 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt $\psi(2S)$ over $J/\psi$ ratio as a percentage for 7 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt $\psi(2S)$ over $J/\psi$ ratio as a percentage for 8 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "longitudinal" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "transverse zero" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "transverse positive" spin-alignment transverse positive hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "transverse negative" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "off-($\lambda_{\theta}$--$\lambda_{\phi}$)-plane positive" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "off-($\lambda_{\theta}$--$\lambda_{\phi}$)-plane negative" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "longitudinal" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "transverse zero" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "transverse positive" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "transverse negative" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "off-($\lambda_{\theta}$--$\lambda_{\phi}$)-plane positive" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "off-($\lambda_{\theta}$--$\lambda_{\phi}$)-plane negative" spin-alignment hypothesis for 7 TeV.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "longitudinal" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "transverse zero" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "transverse positive" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "transverse negative" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "off-($\lambda_{\theta}$--$\lambda_{\phi}$)-plane positive" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $J/\psi$ under the "off-($\lambda_{\theta}$--$\lambda_{\phi}$)-plane negative" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "longitudinal" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "transverse zero" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "transverse positive" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "transverse negative" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "off-($\lambda_{\theta}$--$\lambda_{\phi}$)-plane positive" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Mean weight correction factor for $\psi(2S)$ under the "off-($\lambda_{\theta}$--$\lambda_{\phi}$)-plane negative" spin-alignment hypothesis for 8 TeV. Those intervals not measured in the analysis at low $p_{T}$, high rapidity are also excluded here.

Selection efficiency x Acceptance for a spin-0 resonance.

Reconstructed m_tt spectrum for the boosted selections.

Reconstructed m_tt spectrum for the resolved selections.

Reconstructed m_tt spectrum for the all the selections.

Limits on the production cross-section x branching ratio to tt final states as a function of the mass of Z'TC2.

Limits on the production cross-section x branching ratio to tt final states as a function of the mass of bulk RS KK graviton.

Limits on the production cross-section x branching ratio to tt final states as a function of the mass of bulk RS KK gluon.

Limits on the production cross-section x branching ratio to tt final states as a function of the mass of a scalar.

Limits on the production cross-section x branching ratio to tt final states as a function of the width of a 1TeV bulk RS KK gluon.

Limits on the production cross-section x branching ratio to tt final states as a function of the width of a 2TeV bulk RS KK gluon.

Limits on the production cross-section x branching ratio to tt final states as a function of the width of a 3TeV bulk RS KK gluon.

Migration from the true mtt values to the reconstructed mtt values for the resolved selection.

Migration from the true mtt values to the reconstructed mtt values for the boosted selection.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 10j50 2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 8j80 0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 8j80 2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

Observed 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid.

Observed 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid when the signal cross section is increased by one standard deviation.

Observed 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid when the signal cross section is decreased by one standard deviation.

Expected 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid.

+1 sigma excursion of the expected 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid.

-1 sigma excursion of the expected 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid.

Observed 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid.

Observed 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid when the signal cross section is increased by one standard deviation.

Observed 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid when the signal cross section is decreased by one standard deviation.

Expected 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid.

+1 sigma excursion of the expected 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid.

-1 sigma excursion of the expected 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 8j50 0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 8j50 1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 8j50 2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 9j50 0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 9j50 1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 9j50 2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 10j50 0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 10j50 1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 10j50 2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 7j80 0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 7j80 1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 7j80 2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 8j80 0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 8j80 1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region 8j80 2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions with at no b-jet requirement. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The bins labelled in bold are signal regions, while the others are validation regions. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions with at least 1 b-jet. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The bins labelled in bold are signal regions, while the others are validation regions. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions with at least 2 b-jets. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The bins labelled in bold are signal regions, while the others are validation regions. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Summary of all 15 signal regions (post-fit).

Signal region yielding the best-expected CLs value, the best expected CLs value, and the corresponding observed CLs value for the 2Step grid.

Signal region yielding the best-expected CLs value, the best expected CLs value, and the corresponding observed CLs value for the pMSSM grid.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section for 2-step signal points for the best-expected signal region.

Performance of the 8j50-0b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j50-1b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j50-2b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 9j50-0b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 9j50-1b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 9j50-2b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 10j50-0b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 10j50-1b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 10j50-2b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 7j80-0b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 7j80-1b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 7j80-2b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j80-0b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j80-1b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j80-2b selection for the pMSSM grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j50-0b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j50-1b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j50-2b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 9j50-0b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 9j50-1b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 9j50-2b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 10j50-0b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 10j50-1b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 10j50-2b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 7j80-0b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 7j80-1b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 7j80-2b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j80-0b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j80-1b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Performance of the 8j80-2b selection for the 2Step grid: number of generated signal events; total signal cross-section; acceptance; efficiency (fractional); observed CL using this region alone; expected CL using this region alone.

Normalised fiducial ttbar differential cross-section for the jet pull angle distribution constructed using all particles. No uncertainty due to a potential non-SM colour flow model is included. These data should be taken as the 'default' all-particles pull angle data and uncertainties.

Normalised fiducial ttbar differential cross-section for the jet pull angle distribution constructed using charged particles. No uncertainty due to a potential non-SM colour flow model is included. These data should be taken as the 'default' charged-particles pull angle data and uncertainties.

Statistical+Systematic bin-bin correlation matrix.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $46\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 66\textrm{ GeV},\ 1.6 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $66\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116\textrm{ GeV},\ 0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 0.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $66\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116\textrm{ GeV},\ 0.4 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 0.8$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $66\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116\textrm{ GeV},\ 0.8 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 1.2$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $66\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116\textrm{ GeV},\ 1.2 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 1.6$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $66\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116\textrm{ GeV},\ 1.6 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.0$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $66\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116\textrm{ GeV},\ 2.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $116\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 150\textrm{ GeV},\ 0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 0.8$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $116\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 150\textrm{ GeV},\ 0.8 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 1.6$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $116\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 150\textrm{ GeV},\ 1.6 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $46\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 66\textrm{ GeV},\ |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $66\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116\textrm{ GeV},\ |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\phi^*_{\eta}$ in each bin of $\phi^*_{\eta}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various particle-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $116\textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 150\textrm{ GeV},\ |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins of $\phi^*_{\eta}$) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 0.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.4 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 0.8$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.8 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 1.2$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 1.2 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 1.6$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 1.6 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.0$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 2.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 12 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 20 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 20 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 30 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 30 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 46 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 46 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 66 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $(1/\sigma)\,d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 116 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 150 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 0.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.4 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 0.8$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.8 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 1.2$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 1.2 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 1.6$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 1.6 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.0$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 2.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 12 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 20 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 20 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 30 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 30 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 46 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 46 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 66 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 66 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 116 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

The values of $d\sigma/dp_T^{\ell\ell}$ in pb in each bin of $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ for the electron and muon channels separately (for various generator-level definitions) and for the Born-level combination in the kinematic region $ 116 \textrm{ GeV} \leq m_{\ell\ell} < 150 \textrm{ GeV},\ 0.0 \leq |y_{\ell\ell}| < 2.4$. The associated statistical and systematic (both uncorrelated and correlated between bins) are provided in percentage form. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $p_T^{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

Fiducial cross sections at dressed level in the electron- and muon-pair channels. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are given as a percentage of the cross section. Leptons are required to have $p_T>20$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$. An additional uncertainty of 2.8% on the integrated luminosity, which is fully correlated between channels and among all $m_{\ell\ell}$ bins, pertains to these measurements.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for +0.3 < eta^dijet < +0.8.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -0.3 < eta^dijet < +0.3.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -0.8 < eta^dijet < -0.3.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -1.2 < eta^dijet < -0.8.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -2.1 < eta^dijet < -1.2.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -2.8 < eta^dijet < -2.1.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for +2.1 < eta^dijet < +2.8.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for +1.2 < eta^dijet < +2.1.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for +0.8 < eta^dijet < +1.2.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for +0.3 < eta^dijet < +0.8.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -0.3 < eta^dijet < +0.3.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -0.8 < eta^dijet < -0.3.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -1.2 < eta^dijet < -0.8.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -2.1 < eta^dijet < -1.2.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of dijet pT^avg, shown here for -2.8 < eta^dijet < -2.1.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of x_proj, shown here for 10^-3 < x_targ < 10^-2.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of x_proj, shown here for 10^-2 < x_targ < 10^-1.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of x_proj, shown here for 10^-1 < x_targ < 1$.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of x_proj, shown here for 10^-3 < x_targ < 1$.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of x_targ, shown here for 10^-3 < x_proj < 10^-2.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of x_targ, shown here for 10^-2 < x_proj < 10^-1.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of x_targ, shown here for 10^-1 < x_proj < 1$.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, <SumET>. Reported as a function of x_targ, shown here for 10^-3 < x_proj < 1$.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of x_proj, shown here for 10^-3 < x_targ < 10^-2.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of x_proj, shown here for 10^-2 < x_targ < 10^-1.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of x_proj, shown here for 10^-1 < x_targ < 1$.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of x_proj, shown here for 10^-3 < x_targ < 1$.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of x_targ, shown here for 10^-3 < x_proj < 10^-2.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of x_targ, shown here for 10^-2 < x_proj < 10^-1.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of x_targ, shown here for 10^-1 < x_proj < 1$.

Mean value of the sum of the transverse energy in -4.9 < eta < -3.2 in pp collisions, divided by a reference value (see text), <SumET>/<SumET>^ref. Reported as a function of x_targ, shown here for 10^-3 < x_proj < 1$.

The average charged particle multiplicity for the more central jet and a charged particle threshold of 0.5 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

The average charged particle multiplicity for the more central jet and a charged particle threshold of 2 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

The average charged particle multiplicity for the more central jet and a charged particle threshold of 5 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

The average charged particle multiplicity differnce between the more forward and the more central jets and a charged particle threshold of 0.5 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

The average charged particle multiplicity differnce between the more forward and the more central jets and a charged particle threshold of 2 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

The average charged particle multiplicity differnce between the more forward and the more central jets and a charged particle threshold of 5 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

The average charged particle multiplicity for the sum of the more forward and the more central jets and a charged particle threshold of 0.5 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

The average charged particle multiplicity for the sum of the more forward and the more central jets and a charged particle threshold of 2 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

The average charged particle multiplicity for the sum of the more forward and the more central jets and a charged particle threshold of 5 GeV as a function of the jet transverse momentum.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicity distribution in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Extrapolated charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Extrapolated charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Extrapolated charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Extrapolated average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <0.8.

Charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <0.8.

Charged-particle multiplicity distribution in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <0.8.

Average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <0.8.

Extrapolated charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of pseudorapidity for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <0.8.

Extrapolated charged-particle multiplicities in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of transverse momentum for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <0.8.

Extrapolated charged-particle multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <0.8.

Extrapolated average transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13000 GeV as a function of the number of charged particles in the event for events with the number of charged particles >=1 having transverse momentum >500 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <0.8.