Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta^{p_{\mathrm{T}}}_{13}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta^{p_{\mathrm{T}}}_{23}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta^{p_{\mathrm{T}}}_{14}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta^{p_{\mathrm{T}}}_{24}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{12}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{13}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{23}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{14}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta\phi_{24}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{12}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{34}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{13}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{23}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{14}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\Delta y_{24}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\phi_{1+2} - \phi_{3+4}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\phi_{1+3} - \phi_{2+4}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

Normalized distribution of the variable $\phi_{1+4} - \phi_{2+3}$, defined in Eq (16) of the paper, in data after unfolding to particle level.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

D$^{0}$-meson relative yields for the sum of particle and antiparticle in several multiplicity and PT intervals for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV as a function of the relative average multiplicity in the V0 detector, $N_{V0} \big/ \langle N_{V0} \rangle$. The yields reported here are not corrected by the trigger selection efficiency, they are normalised to the visible cross section.

Fraction of non-prompt JPSI measured for PT > 1.3 GeV/c, $f_{\rm B}$(%), and extrapolated down to PT > 0, $f_{\rm B}^{\rm extr}$(%) in the various multiplicity intervals. The first and second uncertainties correspond to the statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

Prompt and non-prompt relative JPSI relative yields for PT > 0 in the in different multiplicity bins. The first and second uncertainties correspond to the statistical and systematic uncertainties respectively. The yields reported here are normalised to the inelastic cross section.

Prompt and non-prompt relative JPSI relative yields for PT > 0 in the in different multiplicity bins. The first and second uncertainties correspond to the statistical and systematic uncertainties respectively. The yields reported here are not corrected by the trigger selection efficiency, they are normalised to the visible cross section.

dN/dy and MEAN(PT) extracted from Levy-Tsallis fits to the measured PI, K, P spectra at mid-rapidity in inelastic pp collisions at SQRT(S) = 7 TeV. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties (statistical uncertainties are negligible) are reported. The systematic uncertainty on dN/dy due to normalization to inelastic collisions (+7-4%) is not included. Integrated yields of Kaon/Pion and Proton/Pion ratios are also reported with combined statistical and systematic uncertainties (statistical uncertainties are negligible).

dN/dy and MEAN(PT) extracted from Levy-Tsallis fits to the measured PI, K, P spectra at mid-rapidity in inelastic pp collisions at SQRT(S) = 2.76 TeV. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties (statistical uncertainties are negligible) are reported. The systematic uncertainty on dN/dy due to normalization to inelastic collisions (+6-4%) is not included. Integrated yields of Kaon/Pion and Proton/Pion ratios are also reported with combined statistical and systematic uncertainties (statistical uncertainties are negligible).

psi(2S) double-differential cross section times branching fraction and the corresponding scaling factors to obtain the cross sections for different polarization scenarios (azimuthal polarization parameter in the center of mass helicity frame lambda_theta^HX = +1, -1, +0.03) as a function of pT for |y| < 1.2.

Ratio of psi(2S) to J/psi differential cross section times branching fractions assuming unpolarized productions as a function of pT for |y| < 1.2.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 1.5 <= |y| < 2.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.4. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 2.0 <= |y| < 2.5 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.4. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 2.5 <= |y| < 3.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.4. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 0.0 <= |y| < 0.5 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 0.5 <= |y| < 1.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 1.0 <= |y| < 1.5 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 1.5 <= |y| < 2.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 2.0 <= |y| < 2.5 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 2.5 <= |y| < 3.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Mean number of jets in rapidity interval as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

First azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

First azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Ratio of second azimuthal angular moment to first as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

Ratio of second azimuthal angular moment to first as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

First azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

First azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Ratio of second azimuthal angular moment to first as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

Ratio of second azimuthal angular moment to first as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 0 < dijet rapidity separation <= 1.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 1 < dijet rapidity separation <= 2.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 2 < dijet rapidity separation <= 3.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 3 < dijet rapidity separation <= 4.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 4 < dijet rapidity separation <= 5.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 5 < dijet rapidity separation <= 6.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 6 < dijet rapidity separation <= 7.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 7 < dijet rapidity separation <= 8.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 0 < dijet rapidity separation <= 1.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 1 < dijet rapidity separation <= 2.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 2 < dijet rapidity separation <= 3.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 3 < dijet rapidity separation <= 4.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 4 < dijet rapidity separation <= 5.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 5 < dijet rapidity separation <= 6.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 6 < dijet rapidity separation <= 7.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 7 < dijet rapidity separation <= 8.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 0 < dijet rapidity separation <= 1.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 1 < dijet rapidity separation <= 2.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 2 < dijet rapidity separation <= 3.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 3 < dijet rapidity separation <= 4.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 4 < dijet rapidity separation <= 5.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 5 < dijet rapidity separation <= 6.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 6 < dijet rapidity separation <= 7.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 7 < dijet rapidity separation <= 8.

Second azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

Second azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Second azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

Second azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $b$-jet $p_T$.

The inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $b$-jet $|y|$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $b$-jet $|y|$.

The inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $y_{\text{boost}}(Z,b)$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $y_{\text{boost}}(Z,b)$.

The inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma^{*}(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $\Delta y(Z,b)$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma^{*}(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $\Delta y(Z,b)$.

The inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma^{*}(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $\Delta\phi(Z,b)$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma^{*}(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $\Delta\phi(Z,b)$.

The inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma^{*}(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $\Delta R(Z,b)$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the inclusive $b$-jet cross-section $\sigma^{*}(Zb)\times N_{b\text{-jet}}$ as a function of $\Delta R(Z,b)$.

The cross-section $\sigma(Zb)$ as a function of $Z$ boson $p_T$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the cross-section $\sigma(Zb)$ as a function of $Z$ boson $p_T$.

The cross-section $\sigma(Zb)$ as a function of $Z$ boson $|y|$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the cross-section $\sigma(Zb)$ as a function of $Z$ boson $|y|$.

Integrated $Z+\ge 2$ $b$-jets cross-section.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the integrated $Z+\ge 2$ $b$-jets cross-section.

The cross-section $\sigma(Zbb)$ as a function of $\Delta R(b,b)$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the cross-section $\sigma(Zbb)$ as a function of $\Delta R(b,b)$.

The cross-section $\sigma(Zbb)$ as a function of $\Delta m(b,b)$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the cross-section $\sigma(Zbb)$ as a function of $\Delta m(b,b)$.

The cross-section $\sigma(Zbb)$ as a function of $Z$ boson $p_T$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the cross-section $\sigma(Zbb)$ as a function of $Z$ boson $p_T$.

The cross-section $\sigma(Zbb)$ as a function of $Z$ boson $|y|$ together with the corresponding non-perturbative corrections.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties (in %) for the cross-section $\sigma(Zbb)$ as a function of $Z$ boson $|y|$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total uncertainty on the measured values of $\sigma(tq)$, $\sigma(\bar{t}q)$, $R_t$, and $\sigma(tq+\bar{t}q)$. The evaluation of the systematic uncertainties has a statistical uncertainty of $0.3\,\%$. Uncertainties contributing less than $1.0\,\%$ are marked with "$<1$" in the paper. To provide numerical values for this table in HEPdata, these uncertainties are approximated with $\pm 0.5\,\%$. This approximation is applied to all measurements for the following uncertainties$:$ JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by-jets, JES pileup, $b$-JES, jet vertex fraction, mistag efficiency and $W+\;$jets shape variation. For the measurement of $\sigma(tq)$ the approximation is applied in addition to the following uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $c$-tagging efficiency, $t\bar{t}$ generator + parton shower and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR. For the measurement of $\sigma(\bar{t}q)$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR. For the measurement of $R_t$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES detector, $b$-tagging efficiency, $c$-tagging efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance and $tq$ scale variations. For the measurement of $\sigma(tq+\bar{t}q)$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $c$-tagging efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $t\bar{t}$ generator + parton shower and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections and normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections as functions of ABS(YRAP(T)).

The cross sections for top-quark and top-antiquark production in the t-channel, together with the cross-section ratio.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections and normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections as functions of ABS(YRAP(TBAR)).

Parametrization factors for the $m_{t}$ dependence [see Eq. (4) in the paper] of $\sigma(tq)$, $\sigma(\bar tq)$, and $\sigma(t q+\bar t q)$.

The cross sections for top-quark and top-antiquark production in the t-channel, together with the cross-section ratio.

The value of $|V_{tb}|^{2}$ is extracted by dividing the measured value of $\sigma(t q+\bar t q)$ by the prediction of the approximate NNLO calculation. The experimental and theoretical uncertainties are added in quadrature.

Event yields for the 2-jet-$\ell^{+}$ and 2-jet-$\ell^{-}$ HPR channels. The expectation for the signal and background yields correspond to the result of the binned maximum-likelihood fit described in Sec. $\mathrm{VI~D}$ in the paper. The uncertainty of the expectations is the normalization uncertainty of each process after the fit, as described in Sec. $\mathrm{VII~F}$ in the paper.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell \nu b)$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell \nu b)$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-antiquark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $|y(t)|$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $|y(\ell \nu b)|$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-quark $|y|$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $|y(\bar t)|$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $|y(\ell \nu b)|$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-antiquark $|y|$ distribution.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Comparison between the measured differential cross sections and the predictions from the NLO calculation using the MSTW2008 PDF set. For each variable and prediction a $\chi^{2}$ value is calculated with HERAfitter using the covariance matrix of each measured spectrum. The theory uncertainties of the predictions are treated as uncorrelated. The number of degrees of freedom (NDF) is equal to the number of bins in the measured spectrum.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, mistag efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(\bar t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The JES $\eta$ intercalibration uncertainty has a sign switch from the first to the second bin. For the $tq$ generator $+$ parton shower uncertainty a sign switch is denoted with $\mp$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $c-$tagging efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, b-JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $b-$tagging efficiency, $c-$tagging efficiency, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(\bar t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content $:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, b-JES, jet energy resolution, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $b-$tagging efficiency, $c-$ tagging efficiency, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$.