Comparison of the observed (black points) and expected (histograms) numbers of events in nonoverlapping $m^{corr}_{\mu\mu}$ intervals in the STA-STA dimuon category, in the signal region optimized for the RPV SUSY model. Yellow and green stacked filled histograms represent mean expected background contributions from QCD and DY, respectively, while statistical uncertainties in the total expected background are shown as hatched histograms. Signal contributions expected from simulated signals indicated in the legends are shown in red and blue. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

Distribution of min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) for TMS-TMS dimuons with $|\Delta\Phi| < \pi/30$, for events in all mass intervals combined, for both the validation (min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) < 6) and signal (min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) > 6) regions. The number of observed events (black circles) is overlaid with the stacked histograms showing the expected numbers of QCD (yellow) and DY (green) background events. Statistical uncertainties in the total expected background are shown as hatched histograms. Signal contributions expected from simulated signals indicated in the legends are shown in red and blue. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. Events are required to satisfy all nominal selection criteria with the exception of the $d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$ requirement. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

Distribution of min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) for TMS-TMS dimuons with $|\Delta\Phi| < \pi/4$, for events in all mass intervals combined, for both the validation (min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) < 6) and signal (min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) > 6) regions. The number of observed events (black circles) is overlaid with the stacked histograms showing the expected numbers of QCD (yellow) and DY (green) background events. Statistical uncertainties in the total expected background are shown as hatched histograms. Signal contributions expected from simulated signals indicated in the legends are shown in red and blue. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. Events are required to satisfy all nominal selection criteria with the exception of the $d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$ requirement. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

Comparison of observed and expected numbers of events in bins of $m^{corr}_{\mu\mu}$ in the TMS-TMS dimuon category, in the signal regions optimized for the RPV SUSY model. The number of observed events (black circles) is overlaid with the stacked filled histograms showing the expected numbers of QCD (yellow) and DY (green) background events in bins of $m^{corr}_{\mu\mu}$ in min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) bin: 6-10. Hatched histograms show statistical uncertainties in the total expected background. Contributions expected from signal events predicted by the RPV SUSY model with the parameters indicated in the legends are shown as red and blue histograms. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

Comparison of observed and expected numbers of events in bins of $m^{corr}_{\mu\mu}$ in the TMS-TMS dimuon category, in the signal regions optimized for the RPV SUSY model. The number of observed events (black circles) is overlaid with the stacked filled histograms showing the expected numbers of QCD (yellow) and DY (green) background events in bins of $m^{corr}_{\mu\mu}$ in min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) bin: 10-20. Hatched histograms show statistical uncertainties in the total expected background. Contributions expected from signal events predicted by the RPV SUSY model with the parameters indicated in the legends are shown as red and blue histograms. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

Comparison of observed and expected numbers of events in bins of $m^{corr}_{\mu\mu}$ in the TMS-TMS dimuon category, in the signal regions optimized for the RPV SUSY model. The number of observed events (black circles) is overlaid with the stacked filled histograms showing the expected numbers of QCD (yellow) and DY (green) background events in bins of $m^{corr}_{\mu\mu}$ in min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) bin: >20. Hatched histograms show statistical uncertainties in the total expected background. Contributions expected from signal events predicted by the RPV SUSY model with the parameters indicated in the legends are shown as red and blue histograms. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

Comparison of observed and expected numbers of events in bins of $m_{\mu\mu}$ in the TMS-TMS dimuon category, in the signal regions optimized for the HAHM. The number of observed events (black circles) is overlaid with the stacked filled histograms showing the expected numbers of QCD (yellow) and DY (green) background events in bins of $m_{\mu\mu}$ in min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) bin: 6-10. Hatched histograms show statistical uncertainties in the total expected background. Signal contributions expected from simulated $H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D$ events with the parameters indicated in the legends are shown as red and blue histograms. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

Comparison of observed and expected numbers of events in bins of $m_{\mu\mu}$ in the TMS-TMS dimuon category, in the signal regions optimized for the HAHM. The number of observed events (black circles) is overlaid with the stacked filled histograms showing the expected numbers of QCD (yellow) and DY (green) background events in bins of $m_{\mu\mu}$ in min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) bin: 10-20. Hatched histograms show statistical uncertainties in the total expected background. Signal contributions expected from simulated $H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D$ events with the parameters indicated in the legends are shown as red and blue histograms. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

Comparison of observed and expected numbers of events in bins of $m_{\mu\mu}$ in the TMS-TMS dimuon category, in the signal regions optimized for the HAHM. The number of observed events (black circles) is overlaid with the stacked filled histograms showing the expected numbers of QCD (yellow) and DY (green) background events in bins of $m_{\mu\mu}$ in min($d_0 / \sigma_{d_0}$) bin: >20. Hatched histograms show statistical uncertainties in the total expected background. Signal contributions expected from simulated $H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D$ events with the parameters indicated in the legends are shown as red and blue histograms. Their yields are set to the corresponding median expected 95% CL exclusion limits obtained from the ensemble of both dimuon categories, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. The last bin includes events in the histogram overflow.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 10\ GeV$, in the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories in 2022 data and their combination.The median expected limits obtained from the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories are shown as dashed blue and red curves, respectively; the combined median expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 20\ GeV$, in the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories in 2022 data and their combination.The median expected limits obtained from the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories are shown as dashed blue and red curves, respectively; the combined median expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 30\ GeV$, in the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories in 2022 data and their combination.The median expected limits obtained from the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories are shown as dashed blue and red curves, respectively; the combined median expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 40\ GeV$, in the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories in 2022 data and their combination.The median expected limits obtained from the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories are shown as dashed blue and red curves, respectively; the combined median expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 50\ GeV$, in the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories in 2022 data and their combination.The median expected limits obtained from the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories are shown as dashed blue and red curves, respectively; the combined median expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 60\ GeV$, in the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories in 2022 data and their combination.The median expected limits obtained from the STA-STA and TMS-TMS dimuon categories are shown as dashed blue and red curves, respectively; the combined median expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 10\ GeV$, obtained in this analysis, the Run 2 analysis, and their combination. The observed limits in this analysis and in the Run 2 analysis are shown as blue and red curves, respectively; the median combined expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 20\ GeV$, obtained in this analysis, the Run 2 analysis, and their combination. The observed limits in this analysis and in the Run 2 analysis are shown as blue and red curves, respectively; the median combined expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 30\ GeV$, obtained in this analysis, the Run 2 analysis, and their combination. The observed limits in this analysis and in the Run 2 analysis are shown as blue and red curves, respectively; the median combined expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 40\ GeV$, obtained in this analysis, the Run 2 analysis, and their combination. The observed limits in this analysis and in the Run 2 analysis are shown as blue and red curves, respectively; the median combined expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 50\ GeV$, obtained in this analysis, the Run 2 analysis, and their combination. The observed limits in this analysis and in the Run 2 analysis are shown as blue and red curves, respectively; the median combined expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $B(H \rightarrow Z_DZ_D)$ as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ in the HAHM model, for $m(Z_D) = 60\ GeV$, obtained in this analysis, the Run 2 analysis, and their combination. The observed limits in this analysis and in the Run 2 analysis are shown as blue and red curves, respectively; the median combined expected limits are shown as dashed black curves; and the combined observed limits are shown as solid black curves. The green and yellow bands correspond, respectively, to the 68 and 95% quantiles for the combined expected limits.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde{q}\bar{\tilde{q}})B(\tilde{q} \rightarrow q\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ in the RPV SUSY model, for $B(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}\nu) = 0.5$ and $m(\tilde{q}) = 125\ GeV$. The observed limits for various $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ indicated in the legends are shown as solid curves. The median expected limits and their 68 and 95% quantiles are shown, respectively, as dashed black curves and green and yellow bands for the case of $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$ and omitted for other neutralino masses for clarity. The predicted cross section for $m(\tilde{q}) = 125\ GeV$ is 7200 pb, and falls outside the y-axis range.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde{q}\bar{\tilde{q}})B(\tilde{q} \rightarrow q\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ in the RPV SUSY model, for $B(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}\nu) = 0.5$ and $m(\tilde{q}) = 200\ GeV$. The observed limits for various $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ indicated in the legends are shown as solid curves. The median expected limits and their 68 and 95% quantiles are shown, respectively, as dashed black curves and green and yellow bands for the case of $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$ and omitted for other neutralino masses for clarity. The predicted cross section for $m(\tilde{q}) = 200 GeV$ is 840 pb, and falls outside the y-axis range.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde{q}\bar{\tilde{q}})B(\tilde{q} \rightarrow q\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ in the RPV SUSY model, for $B(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}\nu) = 0.5$ and $m(\tilde{q}) = 350\ GeV$. The observed limits for various $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ indicated in the legends are shown as solid curves. The median expected limits and their 68 and 95% quantiles are shown, respectively, as dashed black curves and green and yellow bands for the case of $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$ and omitted for other neutralino masses for clarity. The predicted cross section for $m(\tilde{q}) = 350\ GeV$ is 50 pb, and falls outside the y-axis range.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde{q}\bar{\tilde{q}})B(\tilde{q} \rightarrow q\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ in the RPV SUSY model, for $B(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}\nu) = 0.5$ and $m(\tilde{q}) = 700\ GeV$. The observed limits for various $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ indicated in the legends are shown as solid curves. The median expected limits and their 68 and 95% quantiles are shown, respectively, as dashed black curves and green and yellow bands for the case of $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$ and omitted for other neutralino masses for clarity. The gray horizontal line indicates the theoretical value of the squark-antisquark production cross section with the uncertainties shown as the gray shaded band.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde{q}\bar{\tilde{q}})B(\tilde{q} \rightarrow q\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ in the RPV SUSY model, for $B(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}\nu) = 0.5$ and $m(\tilde{q}) = 1150\ GeV$. The observed limits for various $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ indicated in the legends are shown as solid curves. The median expected limits and their 68 and 95% quantiles are shown, respectively, as dashed black curves and green and yellow bands for the case of $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$ and omitted for other neutralino masses for clarity. The gray horizontal line indicates the theoretical value of the squark-antisquark production cross section with the uncertainties shown as the gray shaded band.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde{q}\bar{\tilde{q}})B(\tilde{q} \rightarrow q\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ in the RPV SUSY model, for $B(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}\nu) = 0.5$ and $m(\tilde{q}) = 1600\ GeV$. The observed limits for various $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ indicated in the legends are shown as solid curves. The median expected limits and their 68 and 95% quantiles are shown, respectively, as dashed black curves and green and yellow bands for the case of $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$ and omitted for other neutralino masses for clarity. The gray horizontal line indicates the theoretical value of the squark-antisquark production cross section with the uncertainties shown as the gray shaded band.

Fractions of signal events with zero (green), one (blue), and two (red) STA muons matched to TMS muons by the STA to TMS association procedure, as a function of generated $L_{xy}$, in all HAHM signal samples combined.

Efficiencies of the Run 2 and Run 3 displaced dimuon triggers as a function of $c\tau$ for the HAHM signal events with $m(Z_D) = 50\ GeV$. The efficiency is defined as the fraction of simulated events that satisfy the requirements of the following sets of trigger paths: the Run 2 (2018) triggers (dashed black); the Run 3 (2022, L3) triggers (blue); the Run 3 (2022, L2) triggers (red); and the OR of all these triggers (Run 3 (2022), black). The lower panel shows the ratio of the overall Run 3 (2022) efficiency to the Run 2 (2018) efficiency.

Efficiencies of the Run 2 (2018) (red) and Run 3 (2022) (black) sets of displaced dimuon triggers as a function of $m(Z_D)$ for the HAHM signal events with $c\tau = 1\ cm$. The efficiency is defined as the fraction of simulated events that satisfy the detector acceptance and the requirements of the indicated set of trigger paths. The lower panel shows the ratio of the Run 3 (2022) efficiency to the Run 2 (2018) efficiency.

Efficiencies of the Run 2 (2018) (red) and Run 3 (2022) (black) sets of displaced dimuon triggers as a function of $m(Z_D)$ for the HAHM signal events with $c\tau = 10\ m$. The efficiency is defined as the fraction of simulated events that satisfy the detector acceptance and the requirements of the indicated set of trigger paths. The lower panel shows the ratio of the Run 3 (2022) efficiency to the Run 2 (2018) efficiency.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ for the HAHM signal with $m(Z_D) = 20\ GeV$ in different years of data taking. Efficiencies are computed as the ratios of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate passes all 2016 (dashed green), 2018 (dashed red), and 2022 (solid black) trigger and offline selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the 2022 efficiency to the 2018 efficiency (dashed red) and to the 2016 efficiency (dashed green).

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ for the HAHM signal with $m(Z_D) = 50\ GeV$ in different years of data taking. Efficiencies are computed as the ratios of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate passes all 2016 (dashed green), 2018 (dashed red), and 2022 (solid black) trigger and offline selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the 2022 efficiency to the 2018 efficiency (dashed red) and to the 2016 efficiency (dashed green).

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ for the HAHM model with $m(Z_D) = 10\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ for the HAHM model with $m(Z_D) = 20\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ for the HAHM model with $m(Z_D) = 30\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ for the HAHM model with $m(Z_D) = 40\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ for the HAHM model with $m(Z_D) = 50\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(Z_D)$ for the HAHM model with $m(Z_D) = 60\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 125\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 200\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 350\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 700\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 1150\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 1600\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 50\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 700\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 500\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 1150\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 500\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Overall selection efficiencies as a function of $c\tau(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ for the RPV SUSY model, for events with $m(\tilde{q}) = 1600\ GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}) = 500\ GeV$. The plot shows efficiencies of the two dimuon categories, TMS-TMS (dashed red) and STA-STA (dashed green), as well as their combination (solid black). Each efficiency is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events in which at least one dimuon candidate of a given type (or any type for the combined efficiency) passes all selection criteria (including the trigger) to the total number of simulated signal events. All efficiencies are corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the TMS-TMS dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ smaller than 20 cm in the HAHM signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the STA-STA dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ smaller than 20 cm in the HAHM signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the TMS-TMS dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ 20-70 cm in the HAHM signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the STA-STA dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ 20-70 cm in the HAHM signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the STA-STA dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ 70-500 cm in the HAHM signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the TMS-TMS dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ smaller than 20 cm in the RPV SUSY signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the STA-STA dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ smaller than 20 cm in the RPV SUSY signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the TMS-TMS dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ 20-70 cm in the RPV SUSY signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the STA-STA dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ 20-70 cm in the RPV SUSY signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Signal efficiencies in the STA-STA dimuon category as a function of the smaller of the two values of generated muon $p_T$ and $d_0$ in dimuons with $L_{xy}^\mathrm{true}$ 70-500 cm in the RPV SUSY signal model. The efficiency in each bin is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin that pass the trigger requirements and selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal dimuons in that bin and within the geometric acceptance. The geometric acceptance is defined as the generated longitudinal decay length $L_{z}$ smaller than $8\ m$ and $|\eta^\mathrm{true}|$ of both generated muons forming the dimuon smaller than 2.0. The efficiencies obtained from simulation were further corrected by the data-to-simulation scale factors described in the paper.

Corrected $m(HH)$ distribution in the resolved $4b$ signal region (dots), after the fit under the background-only hypothesis. The error bars on the $4b$ points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background model (teal histogram) is shown with its total post-fit uncertainty (gray band). The final bin includes overflow. Representative spin-0 signal hypotheses (dashed, dotted, and dashed-dotted lines) are overlaid, normalized to the overall expected limits on their cross-sections. The bottom panel shows the difference between the $4b$ distribution and the background model, relative to the background model. No significant excess of data relative to the SM background is observed.

Corrected $m(HH)$ distribution in the resolved $4b$ signal region (dots), after the fit under the background-only hypothesis. The error bars on the $4b$ points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background model (teal histogram) is shown with its total post-fit uncertainty (gray band). The final bin includes overflow. Representative spin-2 signal hypotheses (dashed, dotted, and dashed-dotted lines) are overlaid, normalized to the overall expected limits on their cross-sections. The bottom panel shows the difference between the $4b$ distribution and the background model, relative to the background model. No significant excess of data relative to the SM background is observed.

Cumulative signal acceptance times efficiency as a function of the resonance mass for various selection steps in the boosted channel. The steps up to the $b$-tag categorization are shown for the spin-0.

Cumulative signal acceptance times efficiency as a function of the resonance mass for various selection steps in the boosted channel. The steps up to the $b$-tag categorization are shown for the spin-2.

Cumulative signal acceptance times efficiency as a function of the resonance mass for various selection steps in the boosted channel. The efficiencies of the three b-tag categories are shown for the spin-0 scenario; this efficiency is obtained after the other selection steps including the SR definition. The signal efficiency in the 4b region has a maximum around 1.5 TeV. Above that value the track-jets start to merge together, and for the highest resonance masses the 2b category becomes the most efficient.

Cumulative signal acceptance times efficiency as a function of the resonance mass for various selection steps in the boosted channel. The efficiencies of the three b-tag categories are shown for the spin-2 scenario; this efficiency is obtained after the other selection steps including the SR definition. The signal efficiency in the 4b region has a maximum around 1.5 TeV. Above that value the track-jets start to merge together, and for the highest resonance masses the 2b category becomes the most efficient.

Comparison of the background model (stacked histograms) with data (dots) in the $2b$ validation region. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background uncertainty (gray band) is computed by adding all individual components in quadrature and is not allowed to extend below zero.

Comparison of the background model (stacked histograms) with data (dots) in the $3b$ validation region. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background uncertainty (gray band) is computed by adding all individual components in quadrature and is not allowed to extend below zero.

Comparison of the background model (stacked histograms) with data (dots) in the $4b$ validation region. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background uncertainty (gray band) is computed by adding all individual components in quadrature and is not allowed to extend below zero.

The $m(HH)$ distributions in the boosted $2b$ signal regions (dots), after the fit under the background-only hypothesis. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background model (stacked histogram) is shown with its total post-fit uncertainty (gray band). The uncertainty bands are defined using an ensemble of curves constructed by sampling a multivariate Gaussian probability density function built from the covariance matrix of the fit. Representative spin-0 signal hypotheses (dashed and dashed-dotted lines) are overlaid, normalized to the overall expected limits on their cross-sections. No significant excess of data relative to the SM background is observed.

The $m(HH)$ distributions in the boosted $2b$ signal regions (dots), after the fit under the background-only hypothesis. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background model (stacked histogram) is shown with its total post-fit uncertainty (gray band). The uncertainty bands are defined using an ensemble of curves constructed by sampling a multivariate Gaussian probability density function built from the covariance matrix of the fit. Representative spin-2 signal hypotheses (dashed and dashed-dotted lines) are overlaid, normalized to the overall expected limits on their cross-sections. No significant excess of data relative to the SM background is observed.

The $m(HH)$ distributions in the boosted $3b$ signal regions (dots), after the fit under the background-only hypothesis. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background model (stacked histogram) is shown with its total post-fit uncertainty (gray band). The uncertainty bands are defined using an ensemble of curves constructed by sampling a multivariate Gaussian probability density function built from the covariance matrix of the fit. Representative spin-0 signal hypotheses (dashed and dashed-dotted lines) are overlaid, normalized to the overall expected limits on their cross-sections. No significant excess of data relative to the SM background is observed.

The $m(HH)$ distributions in the boosted $3b$ signal regions (dots), after the fit under the background-only hypothesis. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background model (stacked histogram) is shown with its total post-fit uncertainty (gray band). The uncertainty bands are defined using an ensemble of curves constructed by sampling a multivariate Gaussian probability density function built from the covariance matrix of the fit. Representative spin-2 signal hypotheses (dashed and dashed-dotted lines) are overlaid, normalized to the overall expected limits on their cross-sections. No significant excess of data relative to the SM background is observed.

The $m(HH)$ distributions in the boosted $4b$ signal regions (dots), after the fit under the background-only hypothesis. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background model (stacked histogram) is shown with its total post-fit uncertainty (gray band). The uncertainty bands are defined using an ensemble of curves constructed by sampling a multivariate Gaussian probability density function built from the covariance matrix of the fit. Representative spin-0 signal hypotheses (dashed and dashed-dotted lines) are overlaid, normalized to the overall expected limits on their cross-sections. No significant excess of data relative to the SM background is observed.

The $m(HH)$ distributions in the boosted $4b$ signal regions (dots), after the fit under the background-only hypothesis. The error bars on the data points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The background model (stacked histogram) is shown with its total post-fit uncertainty (gray band). The uncertainty bands are defined using an ensemble of curves constructed by sampling a multivariate Gaussian probability density function built from the covariance matrix of the fit. Representative spin-2 signal hypotheses (dashed and dashed-dotted lines) are overlaid, normalized to the overall expected limits on their cross-sections. No significant excess of data relative to the SM background is observed.

Expected (dashed black lines) and observed (solid black lines) 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section of resonant $HH$ production in the spin-0 signal models. The $\pm 1 \sigma$ and $\pm 2 \sigma$ uncertainty ranges for the expected limits (colored bands) are shown. Expected limits using each of the resolved and boosted channels individually (dashed colored lines) are shown. The nominal $H\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ branching ratio is taken as 0.582.

Expected (dashed black lines) and observed (solid black lines) 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section of resonant $HH$ production in the spin-2 signal models. The $\pm 1 \sigma$ and $\pm 2 \sigma$ uncertainty ranges for the expected limits (colored bands) are shown. Expected limits using each of the resolved and boosted channels individually (dashed colored lines) are shown. The theoretical prediction for the bulk RS model with $k/\bar{M}_{\text{Pl}} = 1$ (solid red line) is shown; the decrease below 350 GeV is due to a sharp reduction in the $G^{*}_{\text{KK}} \rightarrow HH$ branching ratio. The nominal $H\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ branching ratio is taken as 0.582.

Two-dimensional distribution of the invariant mass $m_{DV}$ and the track multiplicity in the High-pT jet SR for observed data events

Two-dimensional distribution of the invariant mass $m_{DV}$ and the track multiplicity in the High-pT jet SR for expected signal events in the strong gluino pair pair production model with m(gluino)=1.8 TeV, m(chi0)=0.2 TeV, tau(chi0)=0.1 ns

Two-dimensional distribution of the invariant mass $m_{DV}$ and the track multiplicity in the Trackless jet SR for observed data events

Two-dimensional distribution of the invariant mass $m_{DV}$ and the track multiplicity in the Trackless jet SR for expected signal events in the electroweak pair production model

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in electroweakino pair production models

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in electroweakino pair production models

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in electroweakino pair production models

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in electroweakino pair production models

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in electroweakino pair production models

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in electroweakino pair production models

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.4 TeV

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.4 TeV

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.4 TeV

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.4 TeV

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.4 TeV

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.4 TeV

Exclusion limits at 95% CL on the production cross section in the electroweak pair production model.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL on the production cross section in the strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.4 TeV

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.0 TeV

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.0 TeV

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.0 TeV

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.0 TeV

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.0 TeV

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.0 TeV

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.2 TeV

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.2 TeV

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.2 TeV

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.2 TeV

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.2 TeV

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and m(gluino)=2.2 TeV

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=50 GeV

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=50 GeV

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=50 GeV

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=50 GeV

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=50 GeV

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=50 GeV

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=450 GeV

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=450 GeV

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=450 GeV

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=450 GeV

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=450 GeV

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the lifetime and mass of the gluino in strong gluino pair production models and m(chi0)=450 GeV

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.01 ns

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.01 ns

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.01 ns

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.01 ns

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.01 ns

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.01 ns

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.1 ns

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.1 ns

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.1 ns

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.1 ns

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.1 ns

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=0.1 ns

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=1 ns

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=1 ns

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=1 ns

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=1 ns

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=1 ns

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=1 ns

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=10 ns

Expected (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=10 ns

Expected (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=10 ns

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=10 ns

Observed (+1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=10 ns

Observed (-1 sigma) exclusion limits at 95% CL on the mass of the gluino and neutralino in strong gluino pair production models and tau(chi0)=10 ns

Exclusion limits at 95% CL on the production cross section in the strong gluino pair production models and m($ ilde{\chi}^0_1$)=1.25 TeV

Acceptance cutflow for the High-pT SR for representative points in the strong gluino pair production model. See additional resources for more information.

Acceptance cutflow for the Trackless SR for representative points in the electroweak pair production model. See additional resources for more information.

Acceptance cutflow for the Trackless SR for representative points in the electroweak pair production model with heavy-flavor quarks final state. See additional resources for more information.

Acceptance cutflow for the High-pT SR for representative points in the electroweak pair production model with heavy-flavor quarks final state. See additional resources for more information.

Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for HighPt SR selections, R < 1150 mm

Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for HighPt SR selections, R [1150, 3870] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for HighPt SR selections, R > 3870 mm

Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for Trackless SR selections, R < 1150 mm

Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for Trackless SR selections, R [1150, 3870] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for Trackless SR selections, R > 3870 mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R < 22 mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [22, 25] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [25, 29] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [29, 38] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [38, 46] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [46, 73] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [73, 84] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [84, 111] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [111, 120] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [120, 145] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [145, 180] mm

Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [180, 300] mm

Cutflow (acceptance x efficiency) for the High-pT SR for representative points in the strong gluino pair production model. See additional resources for more information.

Cutflow (acceptance x efficiency) for the Trackless SR for representative points in the electroweak pair production model. See additional resources for more information.

Cutflow (acceptance x efficiency) for the Trackless SR for representative points in the electroweak pair production model with heavy-flavor quarks. See additional resources for more information.

Cutflow (acceptance x efficiency) for the High-pT SR for representative points in the electroweak pair production model with heavy-flavor quarks. See additional resources for more information.

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $p_T$ of the second-highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $|\eta|$ of the highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $|\eta|$ of the second-highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the pseudorapidity difference between the two highest-$p_T$ jets in the event

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the two highest-$p_T$ jets in the event

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 0 jet, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 1 jet, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 2 jets, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with at least 3 jets, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 0 jet, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 1 jet, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 2 jets, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with at least 3 jets, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Bayesian upper exclusion limits on the ratio $g_{W'}/g_{W}$ for an SSM-like W$\prime$ boson are shown. The unity coupling ratio (blue dotted curve) corresponds to the SSM common benchmark. The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively.

Bayesian lower exclusion limits on the NUGIM G(221) mixing angle $\cot(\theta_{E})$ are shown as a function of the W$\prime$ boson mass. The theoretically excluded region is shaded in grey. The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively.

Bayesian upper exclusion limits at 95% CL on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of a QBH in an associated $ au$ lepton and neutrino final state. Minimum threshold masses $m_{th}$ of up to 6.6 TeV are excluded at 95% CL. The observed limit (solid line) is obtained from the intersection with the LO QBH cross section (blue dotted curve). The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively.

Bayesian upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section of the process $pp\rightarrow\tau\nu$ mediated via LQ exchange in the t-channel. The inner (green) band and the outer (yellow) band indicate the regions containing 68 and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis. The predicted LQ cross section at LO in the three coupling benchmark scenarios is depicted in different colors for $g_{U}=1$. The uncertainty bandy correspond to the sum in quadrature of PDF and scale variations. The first benchmark scenario considers only couplings to left-handed SM fermions (i.e. $\beta_{\text{R}}^{ij}=0$) and is referred to as "best fit LH". The second benchmark, referred to as "best fit LH+RH", considers $|\beta_{\text{R}}^{\text{b}\tau}|=1$ and all other $\beta_{\text{R}}^{ij}=0$. In the third "democratic" benchmark, equal couplings only to LH fermions are assumed, i.e. $\beta_{\text{L}}^{ij}=1$ and $\beta_{\text{R}}^{ij}=0$ for all $i$ and $j$.

Expected and observed lower limits of the LQ mass as a function of the coupling $g_{U}$ in the LH scenario. The blue band shows the 68% and 95% regions of $g_{U}$ preferred by the fit to the b anomalies data.

Expected and observed lower limits of the LQ mass as a function of the coupling $g_{U}$ in the LH+RH scenario. The blue band shows the 68% and 95% regions of $g_{U}$ preferred by the fit to the b anomalies data.

Expected and observed lower limits of the LQ mass as a function of the coupling $g_{U}$ in the democratic scenario. The blue band shows the 68% and 95% regions of $g_{U}$ preferred by the fit to the b anomalies data.

Bayesian upper exclusion limits at 95% CL on each of the Wilson coefficients described by the EFT model based on 2016-2018 data. The three different coupling types represent a left-handed vector coupling ($\epsilon^{cb}_{L}$), tensor-like coupling ($\epsilon^{cb}_{T}$), and scalar-tensor-like coupling ($\epsilon^{cb}_{S_{L}}$). The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively.

Summary of exclusion limits (expected and observed) calculated at 95% CL for full Run-2 CMS data.

Background prediction and observed data yields in the signal region bins. The background yields are obtained from the background-only fit and serve as input to the simplified likelihood reinterpretation scheme. The naming of the bins is "year_binnumber", following the binning from Figure 4.

Matrix of covariance coefficients between signal region bins. The coefficients are obtained from the background-only fit and serve as input to the simplified likelihood reinterpretation scheme. The naming of the bins is "year_binnumber", following the binning used in Figure 4.

Predicted signal yields for the 2017 data-taking period, corresponding to 41.3 fb$^{-1}$, after the application of each search requirement (cumulative) for various signal hypothesis. The requirements listed are presented as total efficiencies w.r.t. the previous selection step.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the $\kappa_{\lambda}$, $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter space, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood expected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) and 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the $\kappa_{\lambda}$, $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter space, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the $c_{gghh}$ versus $c_{hhh}$ HEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood expected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the $c_{gghh}$ versus $c_{hhh}$ HEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the $c_{tthh}$ versus $c_{hhh}$ HEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood exptected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) and 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the $c_{tthh}$ versus $c_{hhh}$ HEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

The observed (filled circles) and expected (hollow circles) 95% CL upper limits on the $HH$ ggF production cross-section in the Standard Model and for seven HEFT benchmark points. The teal and yellow colored bands indicate the $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations on the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties. The predicted cross-sections of each of the models under consideration are shown by the red crosses. The contribution from VBF production to the total $HH$ production cross-section is neglected.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ versus $c_{H}$ SMEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood expected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ versus $c_{H}$ SMEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category. The other coupling modifiers affecting ggF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions. The bands indicate the simulation statistical uncertainty.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category. When varying $\kappa_{\lambda}$, the other coupling modifiers affecting the VBF $HH$ production mode are set to their SM predictions. The bands indicate the simulation statistical uncertainty.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{2V}$ in each analysis category. When varying $\kappa_{2V}$, the other coupling modifiers affecting the VBF $HH$ production mode are set to their SM predictions. The bands indicate the simulation statistical uncertainty.

Expected yields of the signal $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ after applying the analysis preselection and in each analysis category after the final selection. The $HH$ yield is obtained considering both the $ggF$ and $VBF$ contributions. The other coupling modifiers affecting $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions. The bands indicate the simulation statistical uncertainty.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{hhh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{H}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{hhh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{H}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the low mass 1 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the low mass 2 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the low mass 3 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the low mass 4 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the high mass 1 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the high mass 2 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the high mass 3 region.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{hhh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{hhh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{H}$ SMEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{H}$ SMEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value.

Summary of the expected (blue) and observed (orange) one-dimensional constraints at 68% (solid error bars) and 95% (dashed error bars) CL on the coefficients of selected HEFT (top) and SMEFT (bottom) operators describing Higgs boson interactions affecting $HH$ production through gluon--gluon fusion. The results are obtained from one dimensional scans of the profile log-likelihood assuming that all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The contribution from VBF $HH$ production is neglected.

Covariance matrix for the extrapolation uncertainty for the measurement of the absolute differential cross section as a function of the rho observable at parton level.

Normalized differential cross section as a function of the rho observable at parton level.

Covariance matrix for the total uncertainty (i.e. fit including stat., not extrapolation) for the measurement of the normalized differential cross section as a function of the rho observable at parton level.

Covariance matrix for the statistical uncertainty for the measurement of the normalized differential cross section as a function of the rho observable at parton level.

Covariance matrix for the extrapolation uncertainty for the measurement of the normalized differential cross section as a function of the rho observable at parton level.

Correlation matrix for all nuisance parameters and parameters of interest of the Likelihood fit.

This table is a numerical representation of Fig. 8 for all nuisance parameters.

Example description

Example description

Example description

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$

Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$

Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$

One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

N-1 distribution for $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$of observed data and expected background in SRGGWZ-H.

N-1 distribution for $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$of observed data and expected background in SRGGSlep-M.

N-1 distribution for $\sum{p_{\mathrm{T}}^\mathrm{jet}}$of observed data and expected background in SRUDD-ge2b.

N-1 distribution for $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$of observed data and expected background in SRLQD.

N-1 distribution for $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$of observed data and expected background in SRSSWZ-H.

N-1 distribution for $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$of observed data and expected background in SRSSSlep-H(loose).

Signal acceptance for SRGGWZ-H signal region from Fig 10(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRGGWZ-H signal region from Fig 15(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRGGWZ-M signal region from Fig 10(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRGGWZ-M signal region from Fig 15(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRGGWZ-L signal region from Fig 10(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRGGWZ-L signal region from Fig 15(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRGGSlep-L signal region from Fig 12(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRGGSlep-L signal region from Fig 17(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRGGSlep-M signal region from Fig 12(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRGGSlep-M signal region from Fig 17(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRGGSlep-H signal region from Fig 12(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRGGSlep-H signal region from Fig 17(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRUDD-1b signal region from Fig 14(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Signal efficiency for SRUDD-1b signal region from Fig 19(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Signal acceptance for SRUDD-2b signal region from Fig 14(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Signal efficiency for SRUDD-2b signal region from Fig 19(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Signal acceptance for SRUDD-ge2b signal region from Fig 14(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Signal efficiency for SRUDD-ge2b signal region from Fig 19(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Signal acceptance for SRUDD-ge3b signal region from Fig 14(e) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Signal efficiency for SRUDD-ge3b signal region from Fig 19(e) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Signal acceptance for SRLQD signal region from Fig 14(a) in a SUSY scenario where direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$

Signal efficiency for SRLQD signal region from Fig 19(a) in a SUSY scenario where direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$

Signal acceptance for SRSSWZ-L signal region from Fig 11(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSWZ-L signal region from Fig 16(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRSSWZ-ML signal region from Fig 11(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSWZ-ML signal region from Fig 16(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRSSWZ-MH signal region from Fig 11(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSWZ-MH signal region from Fig 16(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRSSWZ-H signal region from Fig 11(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSWZ-H signal region from Fig 16(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-H signal region from Fig 13(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-H signal region from Fig 18(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-MH signal region from Fig 13(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-MH signal region from Fig 18(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-L signal region from Fig 13(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-L signal region from Fig 18(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-ML signal region from Fig 13(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-ML signal region from Fig 18(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-H(loose) signal region from Fig 13(e) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-H(loose) signal region from Fig 18(e) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGWZ-H in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1400 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 1000 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGWZ-M in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1400 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 1000 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGWZ-L in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1400 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 1000 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGSlep-L in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 2000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 500 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGSlep-M in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 2000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 500 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGSlep-H in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 2000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 500 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRUDD-1b in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde{t})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRUDD-2b in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde{t})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRUDD-ge2b in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde{t})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRUDD-ge3b in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde{t})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRLQD in a susy scenario where direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 2200 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 1870 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSWZ-L in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 800 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSWZ-ML in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 800 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSWZ-MH in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 800 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSWZ-H in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 800 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-H in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-MH in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-L in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-ML in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-H(loose) in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$

Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$

Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$

The expected minus one standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The expected plus two standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The expected minus two standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The observed exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The median expected exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The expected plus one standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The expected minus one standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The expected plus two standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The expected minus two standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.

The observed exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The median expected exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The expected plus one standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The expected minus one standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The expected plus two standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The expected minus two standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The observed exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The median expected exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The expected plus one standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The expected minus one standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The expected plus two standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

The expected minus two standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $\gamma\gamma$ channel for the case without mass thresholds.

SM background observation/prediction in the WH signal region

SM background prediction vs. observation in the W signal region

SM background observation/prediction in the W signal region

SM background prediction vs. observation in the H signal region

SM background observation/prediction in the H signal region

Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed upper limits on the production cross sections for $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^\mp_1$ assuming that each $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ decays to a W boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$

Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed upper limits on the production cross sections for $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ assuming that each $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ decays to a W boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$ and the $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ decays to a Z boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$

Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed upper limits on the production cross sections for $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ assuming that each $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ decays to a W boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$ and the $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ decays to a H boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$

Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections

The 95% CL observed upper limits on the production cross sections for mass-degenerate higgsino-like$\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^\mp_1$, $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$, $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_3$ and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_3$ as functions of the NLSP and LSP masses.

Efficiency of bb-tagger for H(bb), Z(bb) and Z(cc) decays.

Efficiency of W- and V-tagger for W(qq) and Z(qq) decays.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWW in the b-Veto region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWZ in the b-Veto region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWH in the b-Veto region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiHZ in the b-Veto region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWW in the WHSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWW in the WSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWW in the HSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWZ in the WHSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWZ in the WSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWZ in the HSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWH in the WHSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWH in the WSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWH in the HSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with uncertainties for TChiHZ in the WHSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with uncertainties for TChiHZ in the WSR region.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiHZ in the HSR region.

Covariance matrix for the signal regions, derived from a fit to the control regions only under the background-only hypothesis.

Correlation matrix for the signal regions, derived from a fit to the control regions only under the background-only hypothesis.

Post-fit distribution of the $M(ll)$ variable for the ultrahigh-$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ bins in the '2l soft' signal region of the '2/3l soft' analysis.

Post-fit distribution of the $M(ll)$ variable for the low-$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ bins in the '3l soft' signal region of the the '2/3l soft' analysis.

Post-fit distribution of the $M(ll)$ variable for the medium-$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ bins in the '3l soft' signal region of the the '2/3l soft' analysis.

Post-fit distribution of the $m_{\mathrm{T2}}(ll)$ variable for low-$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ bins in the '2l soft' signal region of the '2/3l soft' analysis.

Post-fit distribution of the $m_{\mathrm{T2}}(ll)$ variable for medium-$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ bins in the '2l soft' signal region of the '2/3l soft' analysis.

Post-fit distribution of the $m_{\mathrm{T2}}(ll)$ variable for high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ bins in the '2l soft' signal region of the '2/3l soft' analysis.

Post-fit distribution of the $m_{\mathrm{T2}}(ll)$ variable for ultrahigh-$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ bins in the '2l soft' signal region of the '2/3l soft' analysis.

2SS $\ell/{\geq}\,3\ell$ search: observed and expected yields across the SRs in category A, events with three light leptons of which at least two form an OSSF pair, after the requirement that the leading-lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ be greater than 30 GeV is applied.

2SS $\ell/{\geq}\,3\ell$ search: observed and expected yields across the SRs of the '${\geq}\ 3\ell$' search in category B, events with three light leptons and no OSSF pair, after the requirement that the leading-lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ be greater than 30 GeV is applied.

Wino-bino model: cross section limits in the model parameter space, for wino-like chargino-neutralino production in the WZ topology for the full parameter space.

Wino-bino model: cross section limits in the model parameter space, for wino-like chargino-neutralino production in the WZ topology for the compressed space.

Wino-bino model: cross section limits in the model parameter space, for wino-like chargino-neutralino production in the WH topology for the full parameter space.

Wino-bino model: cross section limits in the model parameter space, for wino-like chargino-neutralino production with mixed topology with equal branching fraction to WZ and WH.

Wino-bino model: exclusion contours from the individual and combined analyses targeting WZ topology for the full parameter space. For visualization of the exclusion contours, linear interpolation is employed to account for the limited granularity of the available signal samples.

Wino-bino model: exclusion contours from the individual and combined analyses targeting the corresponding compressed region. For visualization of the exclusion contours, linear interpolation is employed to account for the limited granularity of the available signal samples.

Wino-bino model: exclusion contours from the individual and combined analyses targeting the WH topology for the full parameter space. For visualization of the exclusion contours, linear interpolation is employed to account for the limited granularity of the available signal samples.

Wino-bino model: exclusion contours from the individual and combined analyses targeting combined contours for these two topologies. For visualization of the exclusion contours, linear interpolation is employed to account for the limited granularity of the available signal samples.

GMSB model: expected and observed cross section limits for the neutralino-neutralino production for the ZZ topology.

GMSB model: expected and observed cross section limits for the neutralino-neutralino production for the HH topology.

GMSB model: expected and observed cross section limits for the neutralino-neutralino production for the mixed topology with equal branching fraction to H and Z.

GMSB model: cross section limits for neutralino-neutralino production as a function of the NSLP mass and the branching fraction to the H boson for the combination of the searches.

GMSB model: exclusion limit for neutralino-neutralino production as a function of the NSLP mass and the branching fraction to the H boson for the combination of the searches along with the input searches. For visualization of the exclusion contours, linear interpolation is employed to account for the limited granularity of the available signal samples.

Cross section upper limit(s) in the mass plane of NLSP and LSP masses for the higgsino-bino model.

Mass plane cross section upper limit for direct slepton pair production, with observed and expected exclusion limits in the full mass plane from the combination.

Mass plane cross section upper limit for direct slepton pair production, with observed and expected exclusion limits in the compressed region from '2/3l' soft search.

Distribution of an input to the BDT classifier in the $3\ell$ category: The linear discrimminant $p_{T}^{miss,LD}$. The discriminant is defined by the relation $p_{T}^{miss,LD} = 0.6 p_{T}^{miss} + 0.4 H_{T}^{miss}$, where $H_{T}^{miss}$ corresponds to the magnitude of the vector $p_{T}$ sum of all electrons, muons, taus and small radius jets passing the selection critertia, and $p_{T}^{miss}$ represents the missing transverse momentum vector computed as the negative vector $p_{T}$ sum of all the particles reconstructed by the PF algorithm in the event.

Distributions of the transverse mass $m_{T}$ of the lepton that is not originating from the Z boson decay and the missing transverse momentum in the $3\ell$/WZ control region. The distributions expected for the WZ and ZZ as well as for other background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit used in the signal extraction.

Distributions of the four lepton invariant mass $m_{4\ell}$ in the $4\ell$/ZZ control region. The distributions expected for the ZZ as well as for other background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit used in the signal extraction.

Distributions of the transverse mass $m_{T}$ of the leading lepton and the missing transverse momentum in the $2\ell$(ss) control region. The distributions expected for the misidentified $\ell$ background as well as for other background processes is shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the background-only ML fit, in which the HH signal is constrained to be zero.

Distributions of the reconstructed HH mass $m_{HH}$ in the $2\ell+2 au_{h}$ control region. The distributions expected for the misidentified $\ell/ au_{h}$ background as well as for other background processes is shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the background-only ML fit, in which the HH signal is constrained to be zero.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for nonresonant HH production and evaluated for the benchmark scenario JHEP04 BM7 for the $2\ell$(ss) category. The SM HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $30$ times the value predicted in the SM. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate signal quantiles.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for nonresonant HH production and evaluated for the benchmark scenario JHEP04 BM7 for the $3\ell$ category. The SM HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $30$ times the value predicted in the SM. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate signal quantiles.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for nonresonant HH production and evaluated for the benchmark scenario JHEP04 BM7 for the $4\ell$ category. The SM HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $30$ times the value predicted in the SM. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate signal quantiles.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for nonresonant HH production and evaluated for the benchmark scenario JHEP04 BM7 for the $3\ell+1 au_{h}$ category. The SM HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $30$ times the value predicted in the SM. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate background quantiles.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for nonresonant HH production and evaluated for the benchmark scenario JHEP04 BM7 for the $2\ell+2 au_{h}$ category. The SM HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $30$ times the value predicted in the SM. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate background quantiles.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for nonresonant HH production and evaluated for the benchmark scenario JHEP04 BM7 for the $1\ell+3 au_{h}$ category. The SM HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $30$ times the value predicted in the SM. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate background quantiles.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for nonresonant HH production and evaluated for the benchmark scenario JHEP04 BM7 for the $4 au_{h}$ category. The SM HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $30$ times the value predicted in the SM. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate background quantiles.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the SM HH production cross section, obtained for both individual search categories and from a simultaneous fit of all seven categories combined.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the HH production cross section as a function of the Higgs boson self-coupling strength modifier $\kappa_\lambda$ for the combination of all seven categories. All Higgs boson couplings other than $\lambda$ are assumed to have the values predicted in the SM.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the HH production cross section as a function of the Higgs boson self-coupling strength modifier $\kappa_\lambda$ for the seven different categories as well as their combination. All Higgs boson couplings other than $\lambda$ are assumed to have the values predicted in the SM.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the HH production cross section for the twelve benchmark scenarios from doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2016)126, the additional benchmark scenario 8a from doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2018)057, the seven benchmark scenarios from doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2020)091, and for the SM.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the HH production cross section for the twelve benchmark scenarios from doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2016)126, the additional benchmark scenario 8a from doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2018)057, the seven benchmark scenarios from doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2020)091, and for the SM. The limits are shown for all seven search categories as well as for their combination.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the HH production cross section as a function of the effective coupling $c_{2}$ for the combination of all seven categories. All Higgs boson couplings other than $c_{2}$ are assumed to have the values predicted in the SM.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the HH production cross section as a function of the effective coupling $c_{2}$ and the top Yukawa coupling modifier $\kappa_{t}$ for the combination of all seven categories. All Higgs boson couplings other than $c_{2}$ and $\kappa_{t}$ are assumed to have the values predicted in the SM. The position of the SM in the ($c_{2}-\kappa_{t}$) plane, as well as the best fit value of $(c_{2},\kappa_{t})=(1.05, 1.74)$ together with contours for the theory cross section are shown as well.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the HH production cross section as a function of the Higgs boson self-coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the top Yukawa coupling modifier $\kappa_{t}$ for the combination of all seven categories. All Higgs boson couplings other than $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and $\kappa_{t}$ are assumed to have the values predicted in the SM. The position of the SM in the ($\kappa_{\lambda}-\kappa_{t}$) plane, as well as the best fit value of $(\kappa_{\lambda},\kappa_{t})=(-3.54, -1.70)$ together with contours for the theory cross section are shown as well.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the HH production cross section as a function of the effective coupling $c_{2}$ and the Higgs boson self-coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ for the combination of all seven categories. All Higgs boson couplings other than $c_{2}$ and $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are assumed to have the values predicted in the SM. The position of the SM in the ($c_{2}-\kappa_{\lambda}$) plane, as well as the best fit value of $(c_{2},\kappa_{\lambda})=(-0.66, 5.33)$ together with contours for the theory cross section are shown as well.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the production of new particles X of spin $0$ and mass $m_{X}$ in the range $250$-$1000$ GeV, which decay to Higgs boson pairs.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the production of new particles X of spin $0$ and mass $m_{X}$ in the range $250$-$1000$ GeV, which decay to Higgs boson pairs. The Limit is shown for the seven different search categories as well as their combination.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the production of new particles X of spin $2$ and mass $m_{X}$ in the range $250$-$1000$ GeV, which decay to Higgs boson pairs.

Observed and expected $95\%$ CL upper limits on the production of new particles X of spin $2$ and mass $m_{X}$ in the range $250$-$1000$ GeV, which decay to Higgs boson pairs. The Limit is shown for the seven different search categories as well as their combination.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for resonances of spin 2 and mass $750\,$GeV production for the $2\ell$(ss) category. The resonant HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $1\,$pb. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate signal quantiles.

Distribution in the output of the BDT trained for resonances of spin 2 and mass $750\,$GeV production for the $3\ell$ category. The resonant HH signal is shown for a cross section amounting to $1\,$pb. The distributions expected for the background processes are shown for the values of nuisance parameters obtained from the ML fit of the signal+background hypothesis to the data. The binning is chosen to approximate signal quantiles.

Predicted and observed yields as a function of $m_{4\ell}$ in the VBS-Suppressed region. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Relative systematic uncertainties in the unfolded differential cross section for 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of m_{jj}

Relative systematic uncertainties in the unfolded differential cross section for 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of m_{4\ell}

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $m_{jj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $m_{jj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $m_{4\ell}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $m_{4\ell}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $ p_{T,4l}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $ p_{T,4l}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $\Delta\phi_{jj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $\Delta\phi_{jj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $|\Delta y_{jj}|$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $|\Delta y_{jj}|$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $cos(\theta^{*}_{12})$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $cos(\theta^{*}_{12})$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $cos(\theta^{*}_{34})$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $cos(\theta^{*}_{34})$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $p_{T,jj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $p_{T,jj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $p_{T,4ljj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $p_{T,4ljj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Enhanced region as a function of $S_{T,4ljj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Differential cross-sections for inclusive 4ljj production in the VBS-Suppressed region as a function of $S_{T,4ljj}$. Overflow events are included in the last bin of the distribution.

Statistical correlation between different bins of the unfolded cross-section for all the measured observables in the VBS-Enhanced region.

Statistical correlation between different bins of the unfolded cross-section for all the measured observables in the VBS-Suppressed region.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}^{Z\gamma}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}^{Z\gamma}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a2}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a2}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a2}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a2}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Expected profiled likelihood on the $\delta c_{Z}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Observed profiled likelihood on the $\delta c_{Z}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Expected profiled likelihood on the $c_{Z\Box}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Observed profiled likelihood on the $c_{Z\Box}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Expected profiled likelihood on the $c_{ZZ}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Observed profiled likelihood on the $c_{ZZ}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Expected profiled likelihood on the $\tilde{c}_{ZZ}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Observed profiled likelihood on the $\tilde{c}_{ZZ}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}^{ggH}$. The signal strength modifiers and the CP-odd HVV anomalous coupling cross section fraction are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}^{ggH}$. The signal strength modifiers and the CP-odd HVV anomalous coupling cross section fraction are treated as free parameters.

Distributions of $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ for data, simulated background and signal events with $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ of 4. The distributions are shown for split-SUSY signals with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1800 GeV. Different gluino proper decay lengths are shown as $c\tau$ in the legend. All distributions are normalized to unity.

Distributions of $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ for data, simulated background and signal events with $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ of $\geq$ 5. The distributions are shown for split-SUSY signals with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1900 GeV. Different gluino proper decay lengths are shown as $c\tau$ in the legend. All distributions are normalized to unity.

Distributions of $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ for data, simulated background and signal events with $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ of $\geq$ 5. The distributions are shown for split-SUSY signals with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1800 GeV. Different gluino proper decay lengths are shown as $c\tau$ in the legend. All distributions are normalized to unity.

The distribution of $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ in different $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ regions for simulated background events. Events with 0 $ < S_{\mathrm{ML}} < $ 0.2 (blue), 0.2 $ < S_{\mathrm{ML}} < $ 0.6 (red), and 0.6 $ < S_{\mathrm{ML}} < $ 1.0 (green) are compared. All distributions are normalized to unity. The similar $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ distributions demonstrate that $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ and $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ are decorrelated.

The distribution of $d_{\mathrm{BV}}$ in $K_{\mathrm{S}}^{\mathrm{0}}$ vertices in data (black) and simulation (purple). The lower panel shows the ratio between data and simulation.

The vertex reconstruction efficiency for artificially displaced vertices in data (black) and simulation (red). In this example, the artificially displaced vertices are corrected to mimic split-SUSY signal events with gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1800 GeV.

The ML tagging efficiency for artificially displaced vertices in data (black) and simulation (red). In this example, the artificially displaced vertices are corrected to mimic split-SUSY signal events with gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1800 GeV.

Number of predicted and observed events in the control, validation, and search regions. Predictions are calculated using Eqs. (2) and (3) and fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. Regions are organized by $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ and $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ values, and region names corresponding with Fig. 7 are given in parentheses. The predicted number of events that pass the $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ selection and the observed number of events that pass or fail the $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ selection are shown in seperate rows.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the split-SUSY signal model with a mass splitting of 100 GeV, shown as a function of gluino mass and $c\tau$. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the split-SUSY signal model with a mass splitting of 100 GeV, shown as a function of gluino mass and $c\tau$. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the split-SUSY model with a $c\tau$ of 10 mm, shown as a function of gluino mass and mass splitting. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the split-SUSY model with a $c\tau$ of 10 mm, shown as a function of gluino mass and mass splitting. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the GMSB SUSY signal model, shown as a function of gluino mass and $c\tau$. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the GMSB SUSY signal model, shown as a function of gluino mass and $c\tau$. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

Distribution of $m_{\mathrm{JJ}}$ in the SR (black points) compared to the background-only expectation, where the shape is derived from the CR and the normalisation is fitted in the SR.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of dark quarks through a $Z^\prime$ as a function of the $Z^\prime$ mass for model A (see the text for details). The darker and lighter shaded bands around the expected limits represent the $\pm 1 \sigma$ and $\pm 2 \sigma$ uncertainty range, respectively.

The predicted theory cross-section times branching ratio for the production of dark quarks through a $Z^\prime$ as a function of the $Z^\prime$ mass for model A (see the text for details). In the theory model, a universal coupling of the $Z^\prime$ to each SM quark $g_q$ is assumed and the dark quarks are all represented by one species with an effective coupling $g_{q_d}$ to the $Z^\prime$. For model A, the predicted cross-section is shown for $g_q=0.05$ and $g_{q_d} = 0.2$.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of dark quarks through a $Z^\prime$ as a function of the $Z^\prime$ mass for model B (see the text for details). The darker and lighter shaded bands around the expected limits represent the $\pm 1 \sigma$ and $\pm 2 \sigma$ uncertainty range, respectively.

The predicted theory cross-section times branching ratio for the production of dark quarks through a $Z^\prime$ as a function of the $Z^\prime$ mass for model B (see the text for details). In the theory model, a universal coupling of the $Z^\prime$ to each SM quark $g_q$ is assumed and the dark quarks are all represented by one species with an effective coupling $g_{q_d}$ to the $Z^\prime$. For model B, the predicted cross-section is shown for $g_q=0.15$ and $g_{q_d} = 0.5$.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of dark quarks through a $Z^\prime$ as a function of the $Z^\prime$ mass for model C (see the text for details). The darker and lighter shaded bands around the expected limits represent the $\pm 1 \sigma$ and $\pm 2 \sigma$ uncertainty range, respectively.

The predicted theory cross-section times branching ratio for the production of dark quarks through a $Z^\prime$ as a function of the $Z^\prime$ mass for model C (see the text for details). In the theory model, a universal coupling of the $Z^\prime$ to each SM quark $g_q$ is assumed and the dark quarks are all represented by one species with an effective coupling $g_{q_d}$ to the $Z^\prime$. For model C, the predicted cross-section is shown for $g_q=0.15$ and $g_{q_d}= 0.5$.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of dark quarks through a $Z^\prime$ as a function of the $Z^\prime$ mass for model D (see the text for details). The darker and lighter shaded bands around the expected limits represent the $\pm 1 \sigma$ and $\pm 2 \sigma$ uncertainty range, respectively.

The predicted theory cross-section times branching ratio for the production of dark quarks through a $Z^\prime$ as a function of the $Z^\prime$ mass for model D (see the text for details). In the theory model, a universal coupling of the $Z^\prime$ to each SM quark $g_q$ is assumed and the dark quarks are all represented by one species with an effective coupling $g_{q_d}$ to the $Z^\prime$. For model D, the predicted cross-section is shown for $g_q=0.05$ and $g_{q_d} = 0.2$.

Relative efficiency (in %) of each stage of the analysis selection with respect to the previous one for models A through D and $m_{Z^\prime}=2.5$ TeV. Approximately 90000 events were generated per signal mass hypothesis.

The $M_{OSSF}$ spectrum for the combined 2L1T, 2L2T, 3L, 3L1T, and 4L event selection (excluding the $\mathrm{Z\gamma}$ control region) and the combined 2016-2018 data set. All three (four) lepton events are required to have $\mathrm{Q_{\ell}=1 (0)}$. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the statistical uncertainties in the background prediction.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $W\phi($ee$)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $W\phi($ee$)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $W\phi($ee$)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $W\phi($ee$)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $Z\phi($ee$)$ SR event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $Z\phi($ee$)$ SR event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $W\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $W\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $W\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $W\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $Z\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $Z\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (ee)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (\mu\mu)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $W\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (\tau\tau)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $Z\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (ee)$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $W\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (\mu\mu)$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $Z\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (\tau\tau)$ PS with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $W\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (ee)$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $Z\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (\mu\mu)$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi (\tau\tau)$ H-like with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (ee)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (\mu\mu)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR4 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (\tau\tau)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR5 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (ee)$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR6 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (\mu\mu)$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR7 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (\tau\tau)$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (ee)$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (\mu\mu)$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi (\tau\tau)$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (ee)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (\mu\mu)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (\tau\tau)$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (ee)$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (\mu\mu)$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (\tau\tau)$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (ee)$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (\mu\mu)$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dimuon pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi (\tau\tau)$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding Limit on $\sigma B(ee)$, $\sigma B(\mu\mu)$ and $\sigma B(\tau\tau)$ plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding Limit on $\sigma B(ee)$, $\sigma B(\mu\mu)$ and $\sigma B(\tau\tau)$ plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding Limit on $\sigma B(ee)$, $\sigma B(\mu\mu)$ and $\sigma B(\tau\tau)$ plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding Limit on $\sigma B(ee)$, $\sigma B(\mu\mu)$ and $\sigma B(\tau\tau)$ plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding Limit on $\sigma B(ee)$, $\sigma B(\mu\mu)$ and $\sigma B(\tau\tau)$ plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding Limit on $\sigma B(ee)$, $\sigma B(\mu\mu)$ and $\sigma B(\tau\tau)$ plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding Limit on $\sigma B(ee)$, $\sigma B(\mu\mu)$ and $\sigma B(\tau\tau)$ plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding Limit on $\sigma B(ee)$, $\sigma B(\mu\mu)$ and $\sigma B(\tau\tau)$ plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ H-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on $g^2_{tS}$ for the dilaton-like $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal model. Masses of the $\phi$ boson above 300 GeV are not probed for the dilaton-like signal model as the $\phi$ branching fraction into top quark-antiquark pairs becomes nonnegligible.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on $g^2_{tPS}$ for the axion-like $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal model. Masses of the $\phi$ boson above 300 GeV are not probed for the axion-like signal model as the $\phi$ branching fraction into top quark-antiquark pairs becomes nonnegligible.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and branching fraction for the H-like production of X$\phi \rightarrow$ ee. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Scalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and branching fraction for the H-like production of X$\phi \rightarrow \mu\mu$. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Pseudoscalar with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on $sin^2 \theta$ for the H-like production and decay of X$\phi$ signal model.

Overlay of observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the coupling parameter and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ Higgs-like with $\phi$ decaying into dielectron, dimuon or ditau pair. Theory cross section for all signals is provived in separate figure Cross section ($pp \rightarrow \ X\phi) [pb]$ and tabulated observed and expected upper limits for each signal model on corresponding to one flavor limit plots.

Cross section in units of pb for the W$\phi$, Z$\phi$, and $t\bar{t}\phi$ signals as a function of the $\phi$ boson mass in GeV. All cross sections are inclusive of all W, Z, $t\bar{t}$ and $\phi$ decay modes.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $t\bar{t} \phi (ee)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the dielectron channel with inclusive t\bar{t} decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $g_{tS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $t\bar{t} \phi (\mu\mu)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the dimuon channel with inclusive t\bar{t} decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $g_{tS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $t\bar{t} \phi (\tau\tau)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the ditau channel with inclusive t\bar{t} decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $g_{tS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $t\bar{t} \phi (ee)$ Pseudoscalar signal model in each signal region of the dielectron channel with inclusive t\bar{t} decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tPS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $g_{tPS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $t\bar{t} \phi (\mu\mu)$ Pseudoscalar signal model in each signal region of the dimuon channel with inclusive t\bar{t} decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tPS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $g_{tPS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $t\bar{t} \phi (\tau\tau)$ PS signal model in each signal region of the ditau channel with inclusive t\bar{t} decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tPS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $g_{tPS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (ee)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the dielectron channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (\mu\mu)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the dimuon channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (\tau\tau)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the ditau channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (ee)$ Pseudoscalar signal model in each signal region of the dielectron channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (\mu\mu)$ Pseudoscalar signal model in each signal region of the dimuon channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (\tau\tau)$ Pseudoscalar signal model in each signal region of the ditau channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (ee)$ Higgs-like signal model in each signal region of the dielectron channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (\mu\mu)$ Higgs-like signal model in each signal region of the dimuon channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $W\phi (\tau\tau)$ Higgs-like signal model in each signal region of the ditau channel with leptonic W decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (ee)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the dielectron channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (\mu\mu)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the dimuon channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (\tau\tau)$ Scalar signal model in each signal region of the ditau channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (ee)$ Pseudoscalar signal model in each signal region of the dielectron channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (\mu\mu)$ Pseudoscalar signal model in each signal region of the dimuon channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (\tau\tau)$ Pseudoscalar signal model in each signal region of the ditau channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (ee)$ Higgs-like signal model in each signal region of the dielectron channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (\mu\mu)$ Higgs-like signal model in each signal region of the dimuon channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Product of acceptance and efficiency for $Z\phi (\tau\tau)$ Higgs-like signal model in each signal region of the ditau channel with leptonic Z decay.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

Example of the signal shape paramertization for W$\phi$ signal, $\phi\rightarrow ee $. Only for illustration purpose. All signals parametrization for all coupling scenarios are provided in SignalParametrizationele.root file and README file with instructions under Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Example of the signal shape paramertization for W$\phi$ signal, $\phi\rightarrow $\mu\mu$ $. Only for illustration purpose. All signals parametrization for all coupling scenarios are provided in SignalParametrizationmu.root file and README file with instructions under Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

Example of the signal shape paramertization for W$\phi$ signal, $\phi\rightarrow $\tau\tau$ $. Only for illustration purpose. All signals parametrization for all coupling scenarios are provided in SignalParametrizationtau.root file and README file with instructions under Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of the mixing angle $sin^2 \theta$ and branching fraction for combined X$\phi$ signal model. Limits for Higgs-like production of $\phi$ boson in the dielectron channel. The inner (green) and the outer (yellow) bands indicate the regions containing 68 and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region corresponding to the Z boson mass window veto. Branching fractions B($\phi \rightarrow $ ee) is arbitrary.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($t \bar{t} \phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of the mixing angle $sin^2 \theta$ and branching fraction for combined X$\phi$ signal model. Limits for Higgs-like production of $\phi$ boson in the dimuon channel. The inner (green) and the outer (yellow) bands indicate the regions containing 68 and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region corresponding to the Z boson mass window veto. Branching fractions B($\phi \rightarrow \mu\mu$) is arbitrary.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($t \bar{t} \phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on $sin^2 \theta$ where $\theta$ is mixing angle, for combined dimuon and ditau channels of X$\phi$ signal model. The inner(green) and the outer (yellow) bands indicate the regions containing 68 and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($W\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $W\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the square of the Yukawa coupling to top quarks $g^2_{S}$ for combined dimuon and ditau channels of $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal model with dilaton-like $\phi$ boson. The inner (green) and the outer (yellow) bands indicate the regions containing 68 and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($W\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $W\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the square of the Yukawa coupling to top quarks $g^2_{PS}$ for combined dimuon and ditau channels of $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal model with ”fermi-philic” axion-like $\phi$ boson. The inner (green) and the outer (yellow) bands indicate the regions containing 68 and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($W\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $W\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($Z\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $Z\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($Z\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $Z\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($Z\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $Z\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $g_{tS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tPS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $g_{tPS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{ee}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

Mass spectra $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\mu\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{e\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{e\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{l\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{l\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\tau\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\tau\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{e\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{l\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\tau\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{e\mu}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{l\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{\tau\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Mass spectra Min. $M_{l\tau}$ or $M_{\tau\tau}$ (GeV) for the full Run 2 data set. In the attached figure the lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction, and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses are indicated in the legend. For reinterpretation we provide signal parameterization and instructions to extract it in Additional resources.

Selected signal shapes of the $W\phi$(ee) signal for illustration purposes. All shape parametrizations for all coupling scenarios of the $X\phi$(ee) signal are provided in the SignalShapes_XPhiToEleEle.root file, and a README file with instructions is provided under Additional Resources.

Selected signal shapes of the $W\phi$$(\mu\mu)$ signal for illustration purposes. All shape parametrizations for all coupling scenarios of the $X\phi$$(\mu\mu)$ signal are provided in the SignalShapes_XPhiToMuMu.root file, and a README file with instructions is provided under Additional Resources.

Selected signal shapes of the $W\phi$$(\tau\tau)$ signal for illustration purposes. All shape parametrizations for all coupling scenarios of the $X\phi$$(\tau\tau)$ signal are provided in the SignalShapes_XPhiToTauTau.root file, and a README file with instructions is provided under Additional Resources.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bHbH channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bHbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bZbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bHtW channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bZtW channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bHbH channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bHbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bZbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bHtW channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bZtW channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the semileptonic 3-jet bHbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the semileptonic 3-jet bZbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the semileptonic 4-jet bHbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the semileptonic 4-jet bZbZ channel.

The limit at 95% CL on the cross section for VLQ pair production for the branching fraction hypothesis 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, 100% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, and 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$

The limit at 95% CL on the cross section for VLQ pair production for the branching fraction hypothesis 25% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, 25% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, and 50% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$

The limit at 95% CL on the cross section for VLQ pair production for the branching fraction hypothesis 50% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, 50% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, and 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$

The limit at 95% CL on the cross section for VLQ pair production for the branching fraction hypothesis 100% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, and 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$

Median expected exclusion limits on the VLQ mass at 95% CL as a function of the branching fractions $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$ and $\mathcal{B}(B \to tW)$, with $\mathcal{B}(B \to tW) = 1 - \mathcal{B}(B \to bH) - \mathcal{B}(B \to bZ)$. The grey area corresponds to the region where the exclusion limit is less than 1000 GeV.

Median observed exclusion limits on the VLQ mass at 95% CL as a function of the branching fractions $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$ and $\mathcal{B}(B \to tW)$, with $\mathcal{B}(B \to tW) = 1 - \mathcal{B}(B \to bH) - \mathcal{B}(B \to bZ)$. The grey area corresponds to the region where the exclusion limit is less than 1000 GeV.

The number of events in data and simulations after the fit to data in the Top$\gamma$ CR, SS$WW\gamma$ CR, and signal region.

The distributions of the invariant mass of the dilepton-photon system after the signal region selection before the fit to data.The shaded band represents the Monte Carlo statistical unc

Upper limits on the cross section and derived limits in terms of Yukawa coupling at 95% CL for Hγ production initiated by light quarks.

The distributions of the invariant mass of the transverse mass of the WW system after the signal region selection before the fit to data.The shaded band represents the Monte Carlo statistical unc

The distributions of the invariant mass of the dilepton-photon system after the signal region selection before the fit to data.The shaded band represents the Monte Carlo statistical unc

The unrolled two-dimensional mTWW-mll$\gamma$ distributions with category 0 jet after the fit to data. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and expected background. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties, whereas the hatched bands represent the total uncertainties in the predictions.

The distributions of the invariant mass of the transverse mass of the WW system after the signal region selection before the fit to data.The shaded band represents the Monte Carlo statistical unc

The unrolled two-dimensional mTWW-mll$\gamma$ distributions with category 1more jets after the fit to data. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and expected background. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties, whereas the hatched bands represent the total uncertainties in the predictions.

The unrolled two-dimensional mTWW-mll$\gamma$ distributions with category 0 jet after the fit to data. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and expected background. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties, whereas the hatched bands represent the total uncertainties in the predictions.

The unrolled two-dimensional mTWW-mll$\gamma$ distributions with category 1more jets after the fit to data. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and expected background. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties, whereas the hatched bands represent the total uncertainties in the predictions.

Comparison of data and background pT distribution at the preselection level for the second leading jet.

Comparison of data and background BDT discriminant distributions at the preselection level for LQ mass hypotheses of 1500 GeV.

Comparison of data and background BDT discriminant distributions at the preselection level for LQ mass hypotheses of 1800 GeV.

Comparison of data and background BDT discriminant distributions at the preselection level for LQ mass hypotheses of 2000 GeV.

Total signal selection efficiency, defined as the number of events passing the selection divided by the number of generated events. Enhanced preselection is defined as preselection with the additional requirements m_uu>250 and m_uujj>m_lq. The discrete nature of the final selection for each LQ candidate mass produces the observed variation in the efficiency. Relative uncertainties are less than one percent in all cases.

Event yields in the combined 2016--2018 data at the final selection level.

The expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the scalar LQ pair production cross section and the branching fractions β^2 as a function of mLQ. The solid lines represent the observed limits, the dashed lines represent the median expected limits, and the inner dark-green and outer light-yellow bands represent the 68% and 95% CL intervals. The σtheory curves and their blue bands represent the theoretical scalar LQ pair production cross sections and the uncertainties on the cross sections due to the PDF prediction and renormalization and factorization scales, respectively.

The expected and observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of the leptoquark mass and the branching fraction β. The solid line represents the observed limits, the dashed line represents the median expected limits, and the inner dark-green and outer light-yellow bands represent the 68% and 95% CL intervals. The area below the observed limit is excluded.

The geometric acceptance multiplied by the efficiency of the $\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} >$ 200 GeV selection as a function of the proper decay length c$\tau$ for a scalar particle S with a mass of 40 GeV. The acceptance region for DT is defined by requiring the LLP to decay in the region with |z| < 661 cm and 380 cm < r < 736 cm. The acceptance region for CSC is defined by requiring the LLP decay in the region with $|\eta| < 2.4$, r < 695.5 cm, and 661 cm < |z| < 1100 cm or in the region with $|\eta| < 2.4$, r < 270 cm, and 500 cm < |z| < 661 cm. Single CSC cluster requires exactly one LLP to decay in CSC; Single DT cluster requires exactly one LLP to decay in DT; Double cluster requires both LLP to decay in CSC or DT. The denominator in this plot includes all generated events. The nominator includes events that pass the acceptance requirements above and $\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} >$ 200 GeV.

Distributions of the cluster time for signal, where S decaying to $d\bar{d}$ for a proper decay length c$\tau$ of 1 m and mass of 40 GeV, and for a background-enriched sample in data selected by inverting the $N_\text{hits}$ requirement.

The distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m).

The distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for compared to the OOT background ($t_\text{clusters} < 12.5$ ns). The OOT background is representative of the overall background shape, because the background passing all the selections described above is dominated by pileup and underlying events.

The distributions of $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), compared to the shape of background in a selection in which the cluster is not matched to any RPC hit and passes all other selections. The background is dominated by clusters from noise and low-pT particles.

The distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), compared to the shape of background in a selection in which the cluster is not matched to any RPC hit and passes all other selections. The background is dominated by clusters from noise and low-pT particles.

The distributions of $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), compared to the shape of background in a selection in which the cluster is not matched to any RPC hit and passes all other selections. The background is dominated by clusters from noise and low-pT particles.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{clusters}$ passing the $N_\text{hits}$ selection in the search region for CSC-CSC category.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{clusters}$ passing the $N_\text{hits}$ selection in the search region for DT-DT category.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{clusters}$ passing the $N_\text{hits}$ selection in the search region for DT-CSC category.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ in the search region of the single-CSC cluster category are shown. The $N_\text{hits}$ distribution includes only events in bins A and D. The right-hand bin in the Nhits distribution includes overflow events.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ in the search region of the single-CSC cluster category are shown. The $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ distribution includes only events in bins A and B.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ in the search region of the single-DT cluster category are shown. The $N_\text{hits}$ distribution includes only events in bins A and D. The right-hand bin in the Nhits distribution includes overflow events.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ in the search region of the single-DT cluster category are shown. The $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ distribution includes only events in bins A and B.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 3 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 7 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 15 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 40 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 55 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 0.4 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \pi^{0} \pi^{0}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 1 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \pi^{0} \pi^{0}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 7 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \tau^{+} \tau^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 15 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \tau^{+} \tau^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 40 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \tau^{+} \tau^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 55 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \tau^{+} \tau^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 15 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 40 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 55 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 0.4 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \pi^{+} \pi^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 1 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \pi^{+} \pi^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 1.5 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow K^{+}K^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 1.5 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow K^{0}K^{0}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 0.4 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 0.4 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \e^{+} \e^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 2 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 2 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 2 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 2 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 4 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.