Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe, divided by 〈TAA〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

The particle-level di-jet differential cross section. The systematic uncertainty on the data contains contributions from track finding efficiency, track transverse momentum resolution, calorimeter energy resolution, and unfolding uncertainties. For the theory, values are given for the underlying event and hadronization (UEH) correction uncertainty and the quadrature sum of the UEH and theoretical uncertainties. Both the UEH and theoretical uncertainties include contributions from factorization and renormalization scale uncertainties and PDF uncertainties. An 8.8% uncertainty common to all points due to the integrated luminosity determination is also present, but not included in the systematic values quoted below.

Values of gluon X1 and X2 obtained from the PYTHIA detector-level simulation for the same-sign di-jet topology compared to the gluon X distribution for inclusive jets. The inclusive distribution has been scaled down by a factor of 20 compared to the di-jet distributions.

Values of gluon X1 and X2 obtained from the PYTHIA detector-level simulation for the opposite-sign di-jet topology compared to the gluon X distribution for inclusive jets. The inclusive distribution has been scaled down by a factor of 20 compared to the di-jet distributions.

Di-jet A_LL asymmetry vs parton-level invariant mass for the same-sign di-jet topology. The systematic uncertainty on the mass includes contributions from jet energy scale, the correction to parton-level, and the difference between NLO and PYTHIA cross sections. The systematic uncertainty on the asymmetry includes contributions from trigger and reconstruction bias and residual transverse beam polarization components. A 6.5% uncertainty common to all points due to uncertainty on the measured beam polarizations is also present, but not included in the uncertainties quoted below.

Theoretical predictions for the di-jet A_LL asymmetry for the same-sign topology using the DSSV14 and NNPDFpol1.1 polarized PDF sets. The DSSV14 prediction is presented without uncertainty while the systematic uncertainty on the NNPDFpol1.1 prediction contains contributions from factorization and renormalization scale uncertainties and PDF uncertainties.

Di-jet A_LL asymmetry vs parton-level invariant mass for the opposite-sign di-jet topology. The systematic uncertainty on the mass includes contributions from jet energy scale, the correction to parton-level, and the difference between NLO and PYTHIA cross sections. The systematic uncertainty on the asymmetry includes contributions from trigger and reconstruction bias and residual transverse beam polarization components. A 6.5% uncertainty common to all points due to uncertainty on the measured beam polarizations is also present, but not included in the uncertainties quoted below.

Theoretical predictions for the di-jet A_LL asymmetry for the opposite-sign topology using the DSSV14 and NNPDFpol1.1 polarized PDF sets. The DSSV14 prediction is presented without uncertainty while the systematic uncertainty on the NNPDFpol1.1 prediction contains contributions from factorization and renormalization scale uncertainties and PDF uncertainties.

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 >=2 having transverse momentum >100 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 >=2 having transverse momentum >100 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 >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Extrapolated ($\tau > 30$ ps) 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 >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Extrapolated ($\tau > 30$ ps) 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 >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Extrapolated ($\tau > 30$ ps) 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 >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

Extrapolated ($\tau > 30$ ps) 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 >=2 having transverse momentum >100 MeV and absolute(pseudorapidity) <2.5.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ integrated over rapidity range $-1.8<y*<1.3$ for the 0--90% centrality interval for the three geometric models: (a) Glauber, (b) Glauber-Gribov with $\omega_{\sigma}=0.11$ and (c) Glauber-Gribov with $\omega_{\sigma}=0.2$.

$R_{pPb}$ values as a function of $p_{T}$ in the 0--90% centrality interval averaged over $|y*|<0.5$.The $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$ value for the ATLAS centrality correction is calculated with the Glauber model. The total systematic uncertainties, which include the uncertainty in $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$, are indicated by lines of the same colour. Strict quantitative agreement is not expected as each measurement uses different rapidity intervals for the centrality determination and apply different event selection criteria to reject diffractive collisions.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields integrated over $-1.8<y*<1.3$ for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields integrated over $-1.8<y*<1.3$ for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields integrated over $-1.8<y*<1.3$ for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields integrated over $|\eta|<2.3$ for seven centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields integrated over $|\eta|<2.3$ for seven centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields integrated over $|\eta|<2.3$ for seven centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ extracted from the invariant yields for six rapidity ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

$R_{pPb}$ as a function of $y*$ extracted from the invariant yields for eight $p_{T}$ ranges, for eight centrality intervals, and for different geometrical models used to calculate $\langle T_{Pb} \rangle$.

The jet-like yield in $\mid\Delta\eta\mid<$0.78 as a function of $p_T^{trigger}$ for $K_S^0$-h and $\Lambda$-h correlations for 1.5 GeV/$c$ < $p_T^{associated}$ < $p_T^{trigger}$ in minimum bias $d$+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. Statistical errors listed in table. 5.4% systematic error on all points.

The jet-like yield in $\mid\Delta\eta\mid<$0.78 as a function of $p_T^{trigger}$ for $K_S^0$-h and $\Lambda$-h correlations for 1.5 GeV/$c$ < $p_T^{associated}$ < $p_T^{trigger}$ in 0-60% Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. Statistical errors listed in table. 5.4% systematic error on all points.

The jet-like yield in $\mid\Delta\eta\mid<$0.78 as a function of $p_T^{trigger}$ for $K_S^0$-h and $\Lambda$-h correlations for 1.5 GeV/$c$ < $p_T^{associated}$ < $p_T^{trigger}$ in 40-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. Statistical errors listed in table. 5.4% systematic error on all points.

The jet-like yield in $\mid\Delta\eta\mid<$0.78 as a function of $p_T^{trigger}$ for $K_S^0$-h and $\Lambda$-h correlations for 1.5 GeV/$c$ < $p_T^{associated}$ < $p_T^{trigger}$ in 0-12% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. Statistical errors listed in table. 5.4% systematic error on all points.

Centrality dependence of the jet-like yield of $K_S^0$-h and $\Lambda$-h correlations for 3 < $p_T^{trigger}$ < 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ < $p_T^{associated}$ < $p_T^{trigger}$ in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5.4% systematic error on all points.

Centrality dependence of the jet-like yield of $K_S^0$-h and $\Lambda$-h correlations for 3 < $p_T^{trigger}$ < 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ < $p_T^{associated}$ < $p_T^{trigger}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5.4% systematic error on all points.

Centrality dependence of the jet-like yield of $K_S^0$-h and $\Lambda$-h correlations for 3 < $p_T^{trigger}$ < 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ < $p_T^{associated}$ < $p_T^{trigger}$ in $d$+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5.4% systematic error on all points.

Centrality dependence of the jet-like yield of $K_S^0$-h and $\Lambda$-h correlations for 3 < $p_T^{trigger}$ < 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ < $p_T^{associated}$ < $p_T^{trigger}$ in minimum bias $d$+Au and 0-60% central Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5.4% systematic error on all points.

The measured differential cross sections $\rm{d}\sigma/\rm{d}|\eta|$ of $D^{*\pm}$ and $D^\pm$ production with $20<p_T<100\,$GeV. The first and second errors are the statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The systematic uncertainty fractions corresponding to the tracking ($\delta_2$) uncertainties (Table 2 of the paper) are strongly correlated. The fully correlated uncertainties linked with the luminosity measurement ($3.5\%$) and branching fractions ($1.5\%$ and $2.1\%$ for $D^{*\pm}$ and $D^\pm$, respectively) are not shown.

The dihadron correlated yield normalized per radian per unit of pseudorapidity as function of $\Delta\eta$ in d+Au collisions on the away side (|$\Delta\phi$ - $\pi$| < $\pi$/3). Shown is the high FTPC-Au activity data. Trigger and associated particles have 1 < $p_T$ < 3 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.

The dihadron correlated yield normalized per radian per unit of pseudorapidity as function of $\Delta\eta$ in d+Au collisions on the away side (|$\Delta\phi$ - $\pi$| < $\pi$/3). Shown is the high-activity data after subtracting the unscaled low-activity data. Trigger and associated particles have 1 < $p_T$ < 3 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.

The dihadron correlated yield normalized per radian per unit of pseudorapidity as function of $\Delta\eta$ in d+Au collisions on the away side (|$\Delta\phi$ - $\pi$| < $\pi$/3). Shown is the high-activity data after subtracting the unscaled low-activity data. Trigger and associated particles have 1 < $p_T$ < 3 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.

The dihadron correlated yield normalized per radian per unit of pseudorapidity as function of $\Delta\eta$ in d+Au collisions on the near (|$\Delta\phi$| < $\pi$/3) side. Shown is the high-activity data after subtracting the unscaled low-activity data. Trigger and associated particles have 1 < $p_T$ < 3 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.

The dihadron correlated yield normalized per radian per unit of pseudorapidity as function of $\Delta\eta$ in d+Au collisions on the near (|$\Delta\phi$| < $\pi$/3, solid circles) and away side (|$\Delta\phi$ - $\pi$| < $\pi$/3, open circles). Shown are the (a) low and (b) high FTPC-Au activity data, and the high-activity data after subtracting the (c) unscaled. Trigger and associated particles have 1 < $p_T$ < 3 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.

(a) The near-side jetlike correlated yield obtained from Gaussian fit as in Fig. 1 as function of the uncorrected dN/d$\eta$ at midrapidity measured in the TPC. Two event selections are used: FTPC-Au multiplicity and ZDC-Au energy. The curve is the result from a HIJING calculation.

(a) The near-side jetlike correlated yield obtained from Gaussian fit as in Fig. 1 as function of the uncorrected dN/d$\eta$ at midrapidity measured in the TPC. Two event selections are used: FTPC-Au multiplicity and ZDC-Au energy. The curve is the result from a HIJING calculation.

$p_T^{(a)}$ dependence. The ratio of the correlated yields in high over low FTPC-Au multiplicity events as a function of $p_T^{(a)}$ $p_T^{(t)}$ where $p_T^{(a)}$ $p_T^{(t)}$ is fixed.

$p_T^{(a)}$ dependence. The ratio of the correlated yields in high over low FTPC-Au multiplicity events as a function of $p_T^{(a)}$ $p_T^{(t)}$ where $p_T^{(a)}$ $p_T^{(t)}$ is fixed.

(a) The dihadron correlated yield normalized per radian per unit of pseudorapidity as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in d+Au collisions at high (0-20%) FTPC-Au multiplicities. Trigger and associated particles are 1 < $p_T$ < 3 GeV/c within 0.5 < |$\Delta\eta$| < 0.7. ZYAM positions are indicated with arrows.

(a) The dihadron correlated yield normalized per radian per unit of pseudorapidity as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in d+Au collisions at low (40-100%) FTPC-Au multiplicities. Trigger and associated particles are 1 < $p_T$ < 3 GeV/c within 0.5 < |$\Delta\eta$| < 0.7. ZYAM positions are indicated with arrows.multiplicity versus $\Delta\phi$.

The raw associated yield at high FTPC-Au multiplicity minus the unscaled ZYAM-subtracted correlated yields at low FTPC-Au multiplicity versus $\Delta\phi$.

The raw associated yield at high FTPC-Au multiplicity minus the scaled ZYAM-subtracted correlated yields at low FTPC-Au multiplicity versus $\Delta\phi$.

Sample correlations in $\Delta\phi$ ($|\Delta\eta|<$ 1.78) for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-95% $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, and 0-12% central Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The data are averaged between positive and negative $\Delta\phi$ and reflected in the plot.

Background subtracted sample correlations for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ on the near-side for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-95% $d$+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and 0-12% central Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The dependence of the jet-like correlation is shown as a function of $\Delta\eta$ ($|\Delta\phi|<$ 0.78). The data are averaged between positive and negative $\Delta\eta$.

Background subtracted sample correlations for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ on the near-side for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-95% $d$+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and 0-12% central Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The dependence of the jet-like correlation is shown as a function of $\Delta\phi$ ($|\Delta\eta|<$ 1.78). The data are averaged between positive and negative $\Delta\phi$.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $p_T^{\mathrm{trigger}}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-95% $d$+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and 0-12% central Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $p_T^{\mathrm{associated}}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu and 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu, 0-12% Au+Au and 40-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $p_T^{\mathrm{trigger}}$ for 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, and 0-12% and 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $p_T^{\mathrm{associated}}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ for 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, and 0-12% and 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-95% $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $p_T^{\mathrm{trigger}}$ for 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, and 0-12% and 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $p_T^{\mathrm{associated}}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ for 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, and 0-12% and 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-95% $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of ridge yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of ridge yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of ridge yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of ridge yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Ratio of the ridge and jet-like yields on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Ratio of the ridge and jet-like yields on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Ratio of the ridge and jet-like yields on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Ratio of the ridge and jet-like yields on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Pseusdorapidity densities for the INEL>0 class of data as a function of pseudorapidity for centre-of mass energy 0.9 TeV. Note that this data is not in the paper but has been approved by the collaboration.

Pseusdorapidity densities for the INEL>0 class of data as a function of pseudorapidity for centre-of mass energy 2.36 TeV. Note that this data is not in the paper but has been approved by the collaboration.

Pseusdorapidity densities for the INEL>0 class of data as a function of pseudorapidity for centre-of mass energy 7 TeV. Note that this data is not in the paper but has been approved by the collaboration.