Femtoscopic radii as a function od pair transverse momentum $k_{\rm T}$ for seven centrality ranges.

One-dimensional femtoscopic radius $R_{\mathrm inv}$ as a function od pair transverse momentum $k_{\rm T}$ for seven centrality ranges.

The differential cross section of $Z$ boson production scaled by 1/$p_\mathrm{T}^{Z}$, (1/$p_\mathrm{T}^{Z}$) $d\sigma /dp_\mathrm{T}^{Z}$, for $-3<y^\mathrm{*}_{Z}<2$.

The differential cross section of $Z$ boson production scaled by 1/$p_\mathrm{T}^{Z}$, (1/$p_\mathrm{T}^{Z}$) $d\sigma /dp_\mathrm{T}^{Z}$, for $-2<y^\mathrm{*}_{Z}<0$ and $0<y^\mathrm{*}_{Z}<2.

Centrality bias corrected $Z$ boson yields per event for $-3<y^\mathrm{*}_{Z}<2$ scaled by by $\langle N_{coll}\rangle$. (To remove the centrality bias correction each value may be multiplied by the approriate correction value found in arXiv:1412.0976.).

The rapidity differential Z boson yields per event scaled by $\langle N_{coll}\rangle$ for three centrality ranges.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Ratio of $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Centrality dependence of the average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$.

Centrality dependence of the average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$.

Centrality dependence of the average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$.

Centrality dependence of the average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the absolute values of the $q_{2}^{TPC}$, centrality 5-10%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the absolute values of the $q_{2}^{V0C}$, centrality 5-10%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the self-normalized values of the $q_{2}^{TPC}$, centrality 5-10%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the self-normalized values of the $q_{2}^{V0C}$, centrality 5-10%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the absolute values of the $q_{2}^{TPC}$, centrality 30-40%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the absolute values of the $q_{2}^{V0C}$, centrality 30-40%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the self-normalized values of the $q_{2}^{TPC}$, centrality 30-40%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the self-normalized values of the $q_{2}^{V0C}$, centrality 30-40%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the absolute values of the $q_{2}^{TPC}$, centrality 50-60%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the absolute values of the $q_{2}^{V0C}$, centrality 50-60%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the self-normalized values of the $q_{2}^{TPC}$, centrality 50-60%.

Average $\rm v_{2}\{{SP}\}$ variation as a function of the self-normalized values of the $q_{2}^{V0C}$, centrality 50-60%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of charged hadrons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ to unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 10: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm large-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 0-5%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 5-10%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 10-20%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 20-30%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 30-40%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 40-50%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{TPC}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified pions in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified kaons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Fig. 11: Ratio of the $p_{\rm T}$ distribution of identified protons in the $\rm small-q_{2}^{V0C}$ sample to the unbiased sample, centrality 50-60%.

Acceptance times efficiency for the tight channel of the Razor analysis for the direct squark-squark model.

Acceptance for the 1tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the gluino simplified model.

Efficiency for the 1tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the gluino simplified model.

Acceptance for the 2tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the gluino simplified model.

Efficiency for the 2tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the gluino simplified model.

Acceptance for the 1tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the squark simplified model.

Efficiency for the 1tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the squark simplified model.

Acceptance for the 2tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the squark simplified model.

Efficiency for the 2tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the squark simplified model.

Observed limit on the cross-section times branching ratio in fb at 95% CL for the direct squark-squark model.

Observed limit on the cross-section times branching ratio in fb at 95% CL for the gluino simplified model, obtained by the Taus+jets+MET analysis.

Observed limit on the cross-section times branching ratio in fb at 95% CL for the squark simplified model, obtained by the Taus+jets+MET analysis.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M1=60 GeV and $m_{\tilde g}=$1.6 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M2=(M1+mqL)/2 and $m_{\tilde g}=$1.6 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M1=60 GeV with $m_{\tilde g}=$2.2 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M2=(M1+mqL)/2 and $m_{\tilde g}=$2.2 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M1=60 GeV and $m_{\tilde g}=$3.0 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M2=(M1+mqL)/2 and $m_{\tilde g}=$3.0 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed and expected limits on the cross-section times branching ratio in fb at 95% CL for the gluino-mediated stop model with off-shell stops, for mass points with four- or five-body gluino decays, obtained by the SS/3L and 0/1L3B analyses.

: Cut flow for signal regions 0L_4jt+ and 0L_5jt of baseline signal points normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$. The point used for the 0L_4jt+ cutflow is mqL = 1150 GeV, M1 = 60 GeV, M2 = 1000 GeV, m(gluino) = 2200 GeV. The point used for the 0L_5jt cutflow is mqL = 950 GeV, M1 = 100 GeV, M2 = 525 GeV, m(gluino) = 2200 GeV.

Cut flow for the 1L(H)_7-jet SR (electron channel) for the main background from the $t\bar{t}$ production. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for the 1L(H)_7-jet SR (muon channel) for the main background from the $t\bar{t}$ production. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 1L(H)_7-jet SR (electron channel). The signal point is taken from the gluino simplified model with 1-step decay via charginos and parameters $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1145 GeV, $m_{{\tilde \chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 785 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 425 GeV; 20000 events were generated for this point. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 1L(H)_7-jet SR (muon channel). The signal point is taken from the gluino simplified model with 1-step decay via charginos and parameters $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1145 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 785 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 425 GeV; 20000 events were generated for this point. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 1L(H)_7-jet SR (electron channel). The signal point is taken from the gluino simplified model with 1-step decay via charginos and parameters $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1025 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 545 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 65 GeV; 20000 events were generated for this point. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 1L(H)_7-jet SR (muon channel). The signal point is taken from the gluino simplified model with 1-step decay via charginos and parameters $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1025 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 545 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 65 GeV; 20000 events were generated for this point. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 0LRaz_SR$_{\rm loose}$ and 0LRaz_SR$_{\rm tight}$ signal regions of baseline signal point ($m(\tilde{q}, \tilde{\chi}_1^0)=(850, 100)$ GeV) normalized to 20.3 fb$^{-1}$. 5000 events were generated for ths point.

Expected exclusion limits in the gluino-neutralino mass plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu < 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ analyses.

Observed exclusion limits in the $M_3$-$\mu$ plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu > 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ analyses.

Expected exclusion limits in the $M_3$-$\mu$ plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu > 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ analyses.

Contour of exclusion in wino production cross section from the photon+$\ell$ analysis, as a function of the wino mass parameter $m_{\tilde{W}}$. The expected limit is shown along with its $\pm 1$ and $\pm 2$ standard deviation values.

Numbers of selected data events at progressive stages of the selection, for each SR for the diphoton, photon+j and photon+$\ell$ analyses. Where no number is shown the cut was not applied.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the selection, shown for points in the parameter space that typify the region for which each selection of the diphoton, photon+j and photon+$\ell$ analyses is optimized, and scaled to an integrated luminosity of $20.3\,\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$. Where no number is shown the cut was not applied.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ selection, shown for data and signal Monte Carlo datasets.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ selection, shown for data and signal Monte Carlo datasets.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1550 and 1600 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1500$ GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1350 and 1450 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1250 and 1300 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1150 and 1200 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1000 and 1100 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 650 and 800 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 400 and 600 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 100 and 400 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu<0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu<0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu>0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu>0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

Acceptance-times-efficiency (a*e) for the photon+$\ell$ analysis SRs.

The total NLO+NLL strong production cross sections with uncertainties for GGM gluino-neutralino signal points for the diphoton and photon+b analyses. In the variant of the grid used in the diphoton analysis, the electroweak production cross section is negligible.

The total NLO cross sections with uncertainties for GGM wino-bino signal points, for all final states, for the diphoton analysis. The direct bino production cross section is negligible.

The NLO gaugino pair production cross sections with relative uncertainties for GGM gluino-neutralino signal points for the photon+b analysis.

The best signal region used for each signal point in the photon+b analysis.

The total NLO+NLL cross sections with uncertainties for the strong production GGM signal grid for the photon+j analysis.

The total NLO cross sections with uncertainties for the electroweak production GGM signal grid for the photon+j analysis.

The best signal region used for each signal point in the photon+j analysis.

pT-differential inclusive muon $v_{2}$ extracted with two-particle $Q$ cumulants method.

pT-differential inclusive muon $v_{2}$ extracted with scalar product method.

pT-differential inclusive muon $v_{2}$ extracted with two-particle cumulants method.

pT-differential inclusive muon $v_{2}$ extracted with four-particle cumulants method.

pT-differential inclusive muon $v_{2}$ extracted with Lee-Yang zeros (Sum) method.

pT-differential inclusive muon $v_{2}$ extracted with Lee-Yang zeros (Prod) method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with scalar product method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with two-particle $Q$ cumulants method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with scalar product method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with two-particle $Q$ cumulants method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with scalar product method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with two-particle cumulants method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with four-particle cumulants method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with Lee-Yang zeros (Sum) method.

pT-differential $v_{2}$ of muons from heavy-flavour decays extracted with Lee-Yang zeros (Prod) method.

Elliptic flow of muons from heavy-flavour hadron decays as a function of the collision centrality extracted with scalar product method.

Elliptic flow of muons from heavy-flavour hadron decays as a function of the collision centrality extracted with two-particle cumulants method.

$y$-differential production cross section of $\phi$ in p-Pb at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=5.02 TeV, in $p_{\rm T}$ range 2.03 < $p_{\rm T}$ < 3.53

Invariant transverse momentum distribution of deuteron for various centrality classes for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV.

Invariant transverse momentum distribution of deuteron for inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV.

Invariant transverse momentum distribution of $^{3}$He for 0-20% and 20-80% centrality classes for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV.

d/p ratio as a function of event multiplicity.

$^{3}$He/p ratio as a function of event multiplicity. NOTE: $^{3}$He/p ratio is divided by 150 for plotting in Fig. 16.

The coalescence parameters B$_{2}$ as a function of the transverse momentum per nucleon for various centrality classes for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV.

The coalescence parameters B$_{3}$ as a function of the transverse momentum per nucleon for 0-20% and 20-80% centrality classes for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. This table is for the observed limit for BR=75% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. This table is for the expected limit for BR=75% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Observed limit for BR=50% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Expected limit for BR=50% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Observed limit for BR=25% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Expected limit for BR=25% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Observed limit for BR=0% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Expected limit for BR=0% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Summary of the ATLAS Run 1 searches for direct stop pair production in models where the decay mode $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}$ with $ \tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm} \rightarrow W \tilde{\chi_1^0}$ is assumed with a branching ratio of 100%. Limits for the b0L and t1L soft-lepton analyses in two scenarios Delta M = 5 GeV in light green and Delta M = 20 GeV in dark green), for a total of four limits - dM=5 GeV, b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d19 - dM=5 GeV, b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d22 - dM=5 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d40 - dM=5 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d41 - dM=20 GeV, b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d25 - dM=20 GeV, b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d28 - dM=20 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d43 - dM=20 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d44.

Summary of the ATLAS Run 1 searches for direct stop pair production in models where the decay mode $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}$ with $ \tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm} \rightarrow W \tilde{\chi_1^0}$ is assumed with a branching ratio of 100%.Limits for the b0L, t1L and t2L analyses in scenarios with a fixed chargino mass of 106 GeV (dark green) and 150 GeV (light green) - M(ch1)=150 GeV, b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d13 - M(ch1)=150 GeV, b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d16 - M(ch1)=150 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d34 - M(ch1)=150 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d35 - M(ch1)=106 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d37 - M(ch1)=106 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d38 - M(ch1)=106 GeV, t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d25 - M(ch1)=106 GeV, t2L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d26.

Summary of the ATLAS Run 1 searches for direct stop pair production in models where the decay mode $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}$ with $ \tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm} \rightarrow W \tilde{\chi_1^0}$ is assumed with a branching ratio of 100%.Limits for the t1L and t2L analyses in scenarios with the mass of the chargino set to twice the mass of the neutralino - M(ch1)=2M(chi0), t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d31 - M(ch1)=2M(chi0), t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d32 - M(ch1)=2M(chi0), t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d16 - M(ch1)=2M(chi0), t2L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d17.

Summary of the ATLAS Run 1 searches for direct stop pair production in models where the decay mode $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}$ with $ \tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm} \rightarrow W \tilde{\chi_1^0}$ is assumed with a branching ratio of 100%.Limits for the t1L and t2L and WW analyses in scenarios with the mass difference between chargino and neutralino is 10 GeV - dM=10 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d46 - dM=10 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d47 - dM=10 GeV, t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d10 - dM=10 GeV, t2L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d11 - dM=10 GeV, WW observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d45 - dM=10 GeV, WW expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d46.

Exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm + W^{(*)} + \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ with branching ratio of 100% assuming a fixed stop mass of 300 GeV. - t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d49 - t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d50 - b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d7 - b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d10.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where $\tilde{t}_2$ pair production is assumed, followed by the decay $\tilde{t}_2 \rightarrow Z \tilde{t}_1$ or $\tilde{t}_2 \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 h$ and then by $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ with a branching ratio of 100%, as a function of the $\tilde{t}_2$ and $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass. The $\tilde{t}_1$ mass is 180 GeV larger than the neutralino mass. This table is for the t2t1H observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d11 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d8.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where $\tilde{t}_2$ pair production is assumed, followed by the decay $\tilde{t}_2 \rightarrow Z \tilde{t}_1$ or $\tilde{t}_2 \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 h$ and then by $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ with a branching ratio of 100%, as a function of the $\tilde{t}_2$ and $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass. The $\tilde{t}_1$ mass is 180 GeV larger than the neutralino mass. This table is for the t2t1H expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d11 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d8.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=350 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d14 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d15.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=350 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d14 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d15.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=350 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1L/t0L observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d14 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d15.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=350 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1L/t0L expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d14 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d15.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d16 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d17.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d16 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d17.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1L/t0L observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d16 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d17.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1Lt0L expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d16 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d17.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=120 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d18 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d19.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=120 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d18 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d19.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=120 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1L/t0L observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d18 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d19.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=120 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1Lt0L expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d18 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d19.

Observed and expected 95% CL limits on sbottom pair production where the sbottom is assumed to decay as b1->b chi10 with a branching ratio of 100%. - b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d1 - b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d4 - tc observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304459 (root macro) - tc expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304459 (root macro).

Exclusion limits at 95% CL for a scenario where sbottoms are pair produced and decay as b1 -> t chi1+ with a BR of 100% - SS3L observed limit (mchi+=60 GeV): hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/resource/6164/finalExclusionGraphs/SBottomTopCharginoN60_observed.C - SS3L expected limit (mchi+=60 GeV): hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/resource/6164/finalExclusionGraphs/SBottomTopCharginoN60_expected.C - SS3L observed limit (mchi+=2 mchi0): hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/resource/6164/finalExclusionGraphs/SBottomTopCharginoNhalfC_observed.C - SS3L expected limit (mchi+=2 mchi0): hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/resource/6164/finalExclusionGraphs/SBottomTopCharginoNhalfC_expected.C.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL for a scenario where sbottoms are pair produced and decay as b1 -> b chi2 with a BR of 100% - g3b observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304457/d10 - g3b expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304457/d11.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the naturalness-inspired set of pMSSM models from the combination t0L, t1L and tb analyses using the signal region yielding the smallest CLs value for the signal- plus-background hypothesis. This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the naturalness-inspired set of pMSSM models from the combination t0L, t1L and tb analyses using the signal region yielding the smallest CLs value for the signal- plus-background hypothesis. This table is for the expected limit.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mqL3. The limit is obtained as the combination of the t0L, t1L, tb and SS3L analyses, This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mqL3. The limit is obtained as the combination of the t0L, t1L, tb and SS3L analyses, This table is for the expected limit.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mtR. The limit is obtained using the t0L analysis. This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mtR. The limit is obtained using the t0L analysis. This table is for the expected limit.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(qL3). The limit of is obtained as the combination of the t0L, g3b, t2t1Z and SS3L analyses, This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(qL3). The limit of is obtained as the combination of the t0L, g3b, t2t1Z and SS3L analyses, This table is for the expected limit.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(bR). The limit of is obtained as the combination of thet0L, t2t1Z and tb analyses, This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(bR). The limit of is obtained as the combination of thet0L, t2t1Z and tb analyses, This table is for the expected limit.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on the signal strength mu (defined as the ratio of the obtained stop cross section to the theoretical prediction) for the production of stop pairs as a function of m(stop). The stop is assumed to decay as t1->t chi0 or through its three-body decay depending on its mass. The neutralino is assumed to have a mass of 1 GeV.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both pair-produced stop decay exclusively via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \chi^\pm_1$ followed by $\chi^\pm_1 \rightarrow W \chi_1^0$ with $\Delta m(t_1, \chi_1^0)$ = 10 GeV. This table is for the observed limit.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both pair-produced stop decay exclusively via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \chi^\pm_1$ followed by $\chi^\pm_1 \rightarrow W \chi_1^0$ with $\Delta m(t_1, \chi_1^0)$ = 10 GeV. This table is for the expected limit.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both pair-produced stop decay exclusively via three-body or four-body decay (depending on the neutralino and stop mass). This table is for the observed limit. - t1L observed limit (3-body) hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d25 - t1L observed limit (4-body) hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d28 - t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d23.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both pair-produced stop decay exclusively via three-body or four-body decay (depending on the neutralino and stop mass). This table is for the expected limit. - t1L observed limit (3-body) hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d25 - t1L observed limit (4-body) hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d28 - t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d23.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 25% and DM=5GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 25% and DM=5GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 25% and DM=20 GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 25% and DM=20 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 50% and DM=5GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 50% and DM=5 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 50% and DM=20GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 50% and DM=20 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 75% and DM=5GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 75% and DM=5 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 75% and DM=20GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 75% and DM=20 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions in the natural pMSSM model. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions in the natural pMSSM model. This table is for the Expected limit.

Combined exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both stops decay exclusively via $\tilde t_1 \rightarrow t \tilde \chi_1^0 $. Observed limit contour line for the t0L/t1L combination.

Combined exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both stops decay exclusively via $\tilde t_1 \rightarrow t \tilde \chi_1^0 $. Expected limit contour line for the t0L/t1L combination.

Best expected SR for the WW analysis and the three- and four-body decays.

Cross-section upper limit for the WW analysis and the three- and four-body decays.

Expected CLs for the WW analysis and the 3- and 4-body decays.

Observed CLs for the WW analysis and the 3- and 4-body decays.

Best expected SR for the WW analysis and the stop1->chargino1 decay.

Cross section upper limit for the WW analysis and the stop1->chargino1 decay.

Expected CLs for the WW analysis and the stop1->chargino1 decay.

Observed CLs for the WW analysis and the stop1->chargino1 decay.

Cross section upper limit for the t2t1h analysis.

Expected CLs for the t2t1h analysis.

Observed CLs for the t2t1h analysis.

Best expected SR for the tb analysis in the pMSSM model.

Cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the pMSSM model.

Efficiency for the SRinA signal region for the pMSSM model.

Efficiency for the SRinB signal region for the pMSSM model.

Efficiency for the SRinC signal region for the pMSSM model.

Efficiency for the SRexA signal region for the pMSSM model.

Best expected SR for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 5 GeV and BR=50%.

Cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 5 GeV and BR=50%.

Best expected SR for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 20 GeV and BR=50%.

Cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 20 GeV and BR=50%.

Best expected SR and cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 5 GeV and BR=25%.

Best expected SR and cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 20 GeV and BR=25%.

Best expected SR and cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 5 GeV and BR=75%.

Best expected SR and cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 20 GeV and BR=75%.

Exclusion limits for the naturalness-inspired set of pMSSM models from the combination t0L, t1L and tb analyses using the signal region yielding the smallest CLs value for the signal- plus-background hypothesis. This table is for the best expected signal region.

95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mqL3. The limit is obtained as the combination of the t0L, t1L, tb and SS3L analyses, This table is for the best expected signal region.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mtR. The limit is obtained using the t0L analysis. This table is for the best expected signal region.

95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(qL3). The limit of is obtained as the combination of the t0L, g3b, t2t1Z and SS3L analyses, This table is for the best expected signal region.

95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(bR). The limit of is obtained as the combination of the t0L, t2t1Z and tb analyses, This table is for the best expected signal region.