Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ at particle level in the exclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ at particle level in the exclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ at particle level in the exclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ at particle level in the exclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Total cross-section at particle level in the exclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ at particle level in the exclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ at particle level in the exclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator. The last bin includes overflow events.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator. The last bin includes overflow events.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $m^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $m^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $m^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $m^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $m^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $m^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections. The covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments for data and MC statistical uncertainties, and added to the individual covariance matrices for the remaining uncertainties, as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the relative differential cross-section as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Total cross-section at particle level in the inclusive topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the data statistical uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the absolute differential cross-section as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ at particle level in the inclusive topology, accounting for the MC statistical uncertainties.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the absolute differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $\sigma_{WbWb}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bl}_{minimax}$ in the exclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{lep2}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{jet2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $N^{jets}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $m_{T}^{bb4l}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{b1b2}$ in the inclusive topology.

Statistical covariance matrix between the relative differential cross-sections at particle level as function of $p_{T}^{jet1}$ in the inclusive topology and as function of $p_{T}^{bbll}$ in the inclusive topology.

$\xi$ distributions for different jet $p_T$ bins.

$\xi$ distributions for different jet $p_T$ bins.

The $j_T/p_{T}^{\rm jet}$ distributions for different jet $p_T$ bins.

The $j_T/p_{T}^{\rm jet}$ distributions for different jet $p_T$ bins.

$r$ distributions for different jet $p_T$ bins.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lead.\,lep.}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{sub-lead.\,lep.}}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{sub-lead.\,lep.}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{sub-lead.\,lep.}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $|y_{e\mu}|$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $m_{e\mu}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $m_{e\mu}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $m_{e\mu}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $|\Delta\phi_{e\mu}|$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|\Delta\phi_{e\mu}|$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|\Delta\phi_{e\mu}|$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $\cos(\theta^{*})$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $\cos(\theta^{*})$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $\cos(\theta^{*})$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lep}+\mathrm{MET}}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lep}+\mathrm{MET}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lep}+\mathrm{MET}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $m_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $m_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $m_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of the number of jets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable Number of jets ($p_{\mathrm{T}} > $ 30 GeV).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable Number of jets ($p_{\mathrm{T}} > $ 30 GeV).

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $S_{\mathrm{T}}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $S_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $S_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ in the region with 85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ (85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ (85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $|y_{e\mu}|$ in the region with 85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ (85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ (85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ in the region with 150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ (150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ (150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $|y_{e\mu}|$ in the region with 150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ (150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ (150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ in the region with $m_{e\mu}>$ 250, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ ($m_{e\mu}>$ 250).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ ($m_{e\mu}>$ 250).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $|y_{e\mu}|$ in the region with $m_{e\mu}>$ 250, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ ($m_{e\mu}>$ 250).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ ($m_{e\mu}>$ 250).

Measured value of the charge asymmetry, $A_{C}$.

Charge asymmetry $A_C$ measured as a function of the absolute difference of the absolute lepton rapidities $||\eta_{l+}|-|\eta_{l-}||$. The measured values are shown as points, whose error bars represent the statistical uncertainty, while the solid bands indicate the size of the total uncertainty. In the bottom panel, the central value of the charge asymmetry divided by the total uncertainty of the $A_C$ measurement is shown. The measurement is compared with the NNLO+PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO+Pythia8 with vertical lines denoting PDF uncertainties.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $A_{C}$ vs. $||\eta_{l+}|-|\eta_{l-}||$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $A_{C}$ vs. $||\eta_{l+}|-|\eta_{l-}||$.

Charge asymmetry $A_C$ measured as a function of the invariant mass of the dilepton system $m_{e\mu}$. The measured values are shown as points, whose error bars represent the statistical uncertainty, while the solid bands indicate the size of the total uncertainty. In the bottom panel, the central value of the charge asymmetry divided by the total uncertainty of the $A_C$ measurement is shown. The measurement is compared with the NNLO+PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO+Pythia8 with vertical lines denoting PDF uncertainties.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $A_{C}$ vs. $m_{e\mu}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $A_{C}$ vs. $m_{e\mu}$.

Measured value of the asymmetry in the CP-odd observable $O_{z}$, $A_{CP}$.

The 95% CL limits on the cross-section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow Z' \rightarrow \chi \chi$) times branching ratio B in fb with all statistical and systematic uncertainties, for the $R_{\text{inv}}=$0.6 signal points.

Data yield in the PFN signal region.

Yield of data in the ANTELOPE signal region in the binning used for BumpHunter fitting.

Observed correlations between the production cross-sections multiplied by the $H \to WW^{\ast}$ branching ratio measured in data for each of the STXS categories.

Values of the negative log likelihood of 2-dimensional $\sigma_{VBF} \times B{H \to WW^{\ast}}$ versus $\sigma_{ggF} \times B_{H \to WW^{\ast}}$ scans.

Observed correlations between the production cross-sections multiplied by the $H \to WW^{\ast}$ branching ratio measured in data for each of the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ categories.

Expected correlations between the production cross-sections multiplied by the $H \to WW^{\ast}$ branching ratio for each of the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ categories.

Expected values and uncertainties for the signal strengths measured in each of the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ categories, normalised to the corresponding SM predictions, for ggH and EW qqH production.

Best-fit values and uncertainties for the signal strengths measured in each of the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ categories, normalised to the corresponding SM predictions, for ggH and EW qqH production.

The composition of the (orthonormal) eigenvectors defining the rotated basis in terms of operators in the Warsaw basis, labelled in terms of their corresponding Wilson coefficients.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 0-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 10\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 0-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 10\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 1-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 60\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 1-jet $60 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 120\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 1-jet $120 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 1-jet $200 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 300\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 1-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 300\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $200 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 300\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 300\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF same flavour 2-jet $200 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 300\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 300\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 1-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 60\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 1-jet $60 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 120\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 1-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 120\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $700 \leq m_{jj} < 1000\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $1000 \leq m_{jj} < 1500\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 1500\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $700 \leq m_{jj} < 1000\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $1000 \leq m_{jj} < 1500\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 1500\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 1000\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $1000 \leq m_{jj} < 1500\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 1500\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 1000\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $1000 \leq m_{jj} < 1500\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 1500\ \textrm{GeV}$ signal region; the post-fit results are obtained from the 15-POI fit.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the ggF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $350 \leq m_{jj} < 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $0 \leq p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} < 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 700\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 350\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 350\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 350\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF different flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 350\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 350\ \textrm{GeV}$, $-\pi \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < - \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 350\ \textrm{GeV}$, $- \frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < 0$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 350\ \textrm{GeV}$, $0 \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \frac{\pi}{2}$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Post-fit DNN distribution for the VBF same flavour 2-jet $p_{T}^{\ell\ell, \textrm{miss}} \geq 200\ \textrm{GeV}$, $m_{jj} \geq 350\ \textrm{GeV}$, $\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \Delta \phi_{jj}^\pm < \pi$ signal region used in the $\textrm{STXS}_\textrm{CP}$ measurement.

Data from Figure 2, panel d, upper panel, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 0-5% Centrality

Data from Figure 2, panel d, lower panel, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 50-60% Centrality

Data from Figure 3, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=0

Data from Figure 3, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=1

Data from Figure 3, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=2

Data from Figure 3, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=3

Data from Figure 3, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=0

Data from Figure 3, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=1

Data from Figure 3, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=2

Data from Figure 3, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=3

Data from Figure 4, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 0-5% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 5-10% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 10-20% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 20-30% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 30-40% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 40-50% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 50-60% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 60-70% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 0-5% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 5-10% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 10-20% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 20-30% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 30-40% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 40-50% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 50-60% Centrality

Data from Figure 4, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 60-70% Centrality

Data from Figure 5, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 0-5% Centrality

Data from Figure 5, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})/v_{0}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$=1, 0-5% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 6, panel a, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 0-5% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 6, panel b, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 10-20% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 6, panel c, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 30-40% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 6, panel d, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 60-70% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 7, Zero Crossing Point of $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1

Data from Appendix, Figure 7, $\left\langle [p_{T}]\right\rangle$ for $p_{T}$ range of 0.5-10 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1

Data from Appendix, Figure 8, panel a, Closure of Sum Rule 1 for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1

Data from Appendix, Figure 8, panel b, Closure of Sum Rule 2 for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1

Data from Appendix, Figure 9, panel a, $v_{0}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1

Data from Appendix, Figure 9, panel b, $v_{0} / v^{5\%}_{0}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1

Data from Appendix, Figure 10, panel a, $v_{0}\sqrt{N_{ch}}$ vs $N_{ch}$ for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1

Data from Appendix, Figure 10, panel b, $v_{0}\sqrt{N_{ch}}$ vs Centrality for $\eta_{gap}$ = 1

Data from Appendix, Figure 11, $v_{0}(p_{T})\,\sqrt{\left\langle N_{\mathrm{ch}}\right\rangle}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 0-5% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 11, $v_{0}(p_{T})\,\sqrt{\left\langle N_{\mathrm{ch}}\right\rangle}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 5-10% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 11, $v_{0}(p_{T})\,\sqrt{\left\langle N_{\mathrm{ch}}\right\rangle}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 10-20% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 11, $v_{0}(p_{T})\,\sqrt{\left\langle N_{\mathrm{ch}}\right\rangle}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 20-30% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 11, $v_{0}(p_{T})\,\sqrt{\left\langle N_{\mathrm{ch}}\right\rangle}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 30-40% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 11, $v_{0}(p_{T})\,\sqrt{\left\langle N_{\mathrm{ch}}\right\rangle}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 40-50% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 11, $v_{0}(p_{T})\,\sqrt{\left\langle N_{\mathrm{ch}}\right\rangle}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 50-60% Centrality

Data from Appendix, Figure 11, $v_{0}(p_{T})\,\sqrt{\left\langle N_{\mathrm{ch}}\right\rangle}$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-2 GeV, $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, 60-70% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Top row, Left column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=0

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Top row, Left column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=1

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Top row, Left column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=2

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Top row, Left column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=3

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Top row, Right column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=0

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Top row, Right column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=1

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Top row, Right column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=2

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Top row, Right column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=3

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Bottom row, Left column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=0

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Bottom row, Left column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=1

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Bottom row, Left column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=2

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Bottom row, Left column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 0-5% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=3

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Bottom row, Right column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=0

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Bottom row, Right column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=1

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Bottom row, Right column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=2

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 1, Bottom row, Right column, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ for $p^{ref}_{T}$ = 0.5-5 GeV, 60-70% Centrality, $\eta_{gap}$=3

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 2, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 0, and 0-5% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 2, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 0, and 5-10% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 2, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 0, and 10-20% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 2, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 0, and 20-30% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 2, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 0, and 30-40% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 2, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 0, and 40-50% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 2, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 0, and 50-60% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 2, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 0, and 60-70% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 3, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, and 0-5% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 3, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, and 5-10% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 3, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, and 10-20% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 3, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, and 20-30% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 3, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, and 30-40% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 3, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, and 40-50% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 3, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, and 50-60% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 3, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 1, and 60-70% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 4, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 2, and 0-5% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 4, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 2, and 5-10% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 4, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 2, and 10-20% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 4, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 2, and 20-30% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 4, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 2, and 30-40% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 4, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 2, and 40-50% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 4, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 2, and 50-60% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 4, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 2, and 60-70% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 5, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 3, and 0-5% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 5, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 3, and 5-10% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 5, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 3, and 10-20% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 5, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 3, and 20-30% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary, Figure 5, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 3, and 30-40% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary Figure 5, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 3, and 40-50% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary Figure 5, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 3, and 50-60% Centrality

Data from Auxiliary Figure 5, $v_{0}(p_{T})$ For $\eta_{gap}$ = 3, and 60-70% Centrality

VLL &quot;4321&quot; cross-sections at NLO order of accuracy obtained by MadGraph.

SUSY RPV LQD higgsino cross-sections at NLO + NLL order of accuracy obtained by Resummino.

SUSY RPV LQD wino cross-sections at NLO + NLL order of accuracy obtained by Resummino.

Cutflow of the selection requirements for VLL signals with m_VLL =600, 900, and 1200 GeV. The yields correspond to an integrated luminosity of 126 fb^-1 (140 fb^-1) for the BJET (MST and MSDT) signal regions. The first row refers to unweighted event yields, while the yields presented in other rows are computed after applying event weights according to the selected object reconstruction and identification efficiency scale factors. Dashes (–&ndash;) refer to requirements that are not applicable.

The expected acceptance times efficiency (including object identification and reconstruction, trigger selection, and event selection) for VLL signal as a function of m_VLL for the combined signal regions as well as for three individual signal region categories: 1&tau;_had &ge;3b MST, 1&tau;_had &ge;3b BJET and &ge;2&tau;_had &ge;3b MSDT. The region 1&tau;_had &ge;3b MST refers to the combination of 1&tau;_had 3b MST and 1&tau;_had &ge;4b MST signal regions, while the region 1&tau;_had &ge;3b BJET refers to the combination of 1&tau;_had 3b BJET and 1&tau;_had &ge;4b BJET signal regions.

Observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for mϕ≠ 125 GeV. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limits on (σ/σggH)×B for all Higgs boson portal mediator samples where the cross-section is normalized to the SM Higgs boson gluon–gluon fusion production cross-section, σggH = 48.61 pb [97]. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for mϕ≠ 125 GeV benchmark samples. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for mϕ≠ 125 GeV benchmark samples. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for baryogenesis samples for the one-DV analysis. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for baryogenesis samples for the one-DV analysis. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for baryogenesis samples for the one-DV analysis. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Summary of the limits for the Z+ALP model. Comparison between observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the Z+ALP production cross-section σ×Ba →gg for ma = 40 GeV.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on σ×Ba →gg for all considered ALP mass points.

Comparison between the observed and expected 95% CL limits on (σ/σZH) ×BH →ss for Higgs boson portal mediator and ms=35 GeV for Z-associated H production with one DV.

Observed 95% CL limits on (σ/σZH) ×BH →ss for all Higgs boson portal mediator samples where the cross-section is normalized to the Z(arrow ℓℓ)-associated Higgs boson production cross-section, σZH = 0.089 pb .

Observed 95% CL limits on σ×Bϕ →ss for mϕ≠125 GeV. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limits on σ×Bϕ →ss for mϕ≠125 GeV. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the σ×BZd →ff production cross-section for dark photon Zd benchmark samples. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the σ×BZd →ff production cross-section for dark photon Zd benchmark samples. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Expected and observed limits on (σ/σggH) ×B for the 125 GeV boson benchmark samples for the one-DV search. The cross-section is normalized to the SM Higgs boson gluon–gluon fusion production cross-section, σggH = 48.61 pb.

Expected and observed limits on (σ/σggH) ×B for the 125 GeV boson benchmark samples for the one-DV search. The cross-section is normalized to the SM Higgs boson gluon–gluon fusion production cross-section, σggH = 48.61 pb.

Expected and observed limits on (σ/σggH) ×B for the 125 GeV boson benchmark samples for the one-DV search. The cross-section is normalized to the SM Higgs boson gluon–gluon fusion production cross-section, σggH = 48.61 pb.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 60 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 60 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 200 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark sample for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 400 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark sample for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 600 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 600 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 600 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 1000 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 1000 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 1000 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the one-DV search.

Expected and observed limits on (σ/σggH) ×B for the 125 GeV boson benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches. The cross-section is normalized to the SM Higgs boson gluon–gluon fusion production cross-section, σggH = 48.61 pb.

Expected and observed limits on (σ/σggH) ×B for the 125 GeV boson benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches. The cross-section is normalized to the SM Higgs boson gluon–gluon fusion production cross-section, σggH = 48.61 pb.

Expected and observed limits on (σ/σggH) ×B for the 125 GeV boson benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches. The cross-section is normalized to the SM Higgs boson gluon–gluon fusion production cross-section, σggH = 48.61 pb.

Expected and observed limits on (σ/σggH) ×B for the 125 GeV boson benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches. The cross-section is normalized to the SM Higgs boson gluon–gluon fusion production cross-section, σggH = 48.61 pb.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 60 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 60 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 200 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark sample for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 400 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark sample for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 600 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 600 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 600 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 1000 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 1000 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on σ×B for 1000 GeV non-SM Higgs boson scalar benchmark samples for the combination of one- and two- DV searches.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →νbb̄ channel) for the one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →νbb̄ channel) for the one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →νbb̄ channel) for the one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →cbs channel) for one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →cbs channel) for one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →cbs channel) for one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →ντ+ τ- channel) for the one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →ντ+ τ- channel) for the one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed limits for the baryogenesis benchmark samples (χ →ντ+ τ- channel) for the one-DV search, where σSM in the plots is cross-section of the SM Higgs boson production.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits for the Z+ALP benchmark samples. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits for the Z+ALP benchmark samples. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits for the Z+ALP benchmark samples. The observed limits are consistent with the expected ones within the uncertainties.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency maps as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.22 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.22 m.

One-DV vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.22 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.22 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.66 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.66 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.66 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.66 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.13 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.13 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.13 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.13 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.41 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.41 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.41 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.41 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.58 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.58 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.58 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.58 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=1.31 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=1.31 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=1.31 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=1.31 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=2.63 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=2.63 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=2.63 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=2.63 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=1.05 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=1.05 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=1.05 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=1.05 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=5.32 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=5.32 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=5.32 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=5.32 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=100 GeV, cτsim=1.61 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=100 GeV, cτsim=1.61 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=100 GeV, cτsim=1.61 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=100 GeV, cτsim=1.61 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.59 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.59 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.59 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.59 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=1.84 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=1.84 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=1.84 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=1.84 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=3.31 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=3.31 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=3.31 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=3.31 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=4.29 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=4.29 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=4.29 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=4.29 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.41 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.41 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.41 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.41 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=2.40 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=2.40 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=2.40 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=2.40 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=4.33 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=4.33 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=4.33 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=4.33 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=475 GeV, cτsim=6.04 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=475 GeV, cτsim=6.04 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=475 GeV, cτsim=6.04 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=475 GeV, cτsim=6.04 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency maps as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency maps as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency maps as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency maps as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=10 GeV and cτsim=0.92 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=55 GeV and cτsim=5.55 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →bb̄ν channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →cbs channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV barrel trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV endcap trigger 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV barrel vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV endcap vertex 2D efficiency map as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for baryogenesis χ →τ+τ-ν channel with mχ=100 GeV and cτsim=3.50 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region for mALP=0.1 GeV and cτsim=0.003 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region for mALP=0.1 GeV and cτsim=0.003 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region for mALP=0.1 GeV and cτsim=0.003 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region for mALP=0.1 GeV and cτsim=0.003 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mALP=1 GeV and cτsim=0.031 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mALP=1 GeV and cτsim=0.031 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mALP=1 GeV and cτsim=0.031 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mALP=1 GeV and cτsim=0.031 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mALP=10 GeV and cτsim=0.31 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mALP=10 GeV and cτsim=0.31 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mALP=10 GeV and cτsim=0.31 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mALP=10 GeV and cτsim=0.31 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mALP=40 GeV and cτsim=0.48 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mALP=40 GeV and cτsim=0.48 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mALP=40 GeV and cτsim=0.48 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for Z+ALP samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mALP=40 GeV and cτsim=0.48 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, mZd=5 GeV, cτsim=0.6 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, mZd=5 GeV, cτsim=0.6 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, mZd=5 GeV, cτsim=0.6 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, mZd=5 GeV, cτsim=0.6 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, mZd=15 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, mZd=15 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, mZd=15 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, mZd=15 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, mZd=15 GeV, cτsim=3.0 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, mZd=15 GeV, cτsim=3.0 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, mZd=15 GeV, cτsim=3.0 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, mZd=15 GeV, cτsim=3.0 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=250 GeV, mZd=50 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=250 GeV, mZd=50 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=250 GeV, mZd=50 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=250 GeV, mZd=50 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=250 GeV, mZd=100 GeV, cτsim=3.4 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=250 GeV, mZd=100 GeV, cτsim=3.4 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=250 GeV, mZd=100 GeV, cτsim=3.4 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=250 GeV, mZd=100 GeV, cτsim=3.4 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, mZd=100 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudial decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, mZd=100 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, mZd=100 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, mZd=100 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, mZd=200 GeV, cτsim=4.0 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, mZd=200 GeV, cτsim=4.0 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, mZd=200 GeV, cτsim=4.0 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, mZd=200 GeV, cτsim=4.0 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=150 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=150 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=150 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=150 GeV, cτsim=1.6 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=150 GeV, cτsim=4.0 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=150 GeV, cτsim=4.0 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=150 GeV, cτsim=4.0 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=150 GeV, cτsim=4.0 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=400 GeV, cτsim=4.6 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=400 GeV, cτsim=4.6 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=400 GeV, cτsim=4.6 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for HZZd samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, mZd=400 GeV, cτsim=4.6 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.12 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.12 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.12 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.12 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=15 GeV, cτsim=0.25 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=15 GeV, cτsim=0.25 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=15 GeV, cτsim=0.25 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=60 GeV, ms=15 GeV, cτsim=0.25 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.1 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.1 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.1 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.1 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=5 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=16 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=0.75 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=0.75 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=0.75 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=0.75 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=35 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=1.0 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=1.0 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=1.0 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=1.0 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mH=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mH=125 GeV, ms=55 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=80 GeV, cτsim=2.0 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=80 GeV, cτsim=2.0 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=80 GeV, cτsim=2.0 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=200 GeV, ms=80 GeV, cτsim=2.0 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=100 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=100 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=100 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=100 GeV, cτsim=1.25 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=175 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=175 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=175 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=400 GeV, ms=175 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.4 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.4 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.4 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.4 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=1.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=1.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=1.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=1.5 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=150 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=600 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=2.5 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=50 GeV, cτsim=0.3 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=1.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=1.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=1.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=1.5 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=275 GeV, cτsim=3.5 m.

One-DV barrel trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=475 GeV, cτsim=4.5 m.

One-DV endcap trigger efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=475 GeV, cτsim=4.5 m.

One-DV barrel vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and transverse decay position Lxy for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=475 GeV, cτsim=4.5 m.

One-DV endcap vertex efficiency for ZH samples in the lepton-triggered region as a function of the LLP boost β and longitudinal decay position Lz for mϕ=1000 GeV, ms=475 GeV, cτsim=4.5 m.

Observed profile likelihood as a function of $\sigma\times\mathcal{B}_{H\rightarrow WW^{*}}$ normalised by the SM expectation for the single-channel measurements

Two-dimensional likelihood scan of the measured values of $\sigma_{ZH}\times\mathcal{B}_{H\rightarrow WW^{*}}$ vs. $\sigma_{WH}\times\mathcal{B}_{H\rightarrow WW^{*}}$.

The observed values of the background normalisation factors for the combined 2-POI fit. The uncertainties correspond to the total of all statistical and systematic sources.

Measured cross sections times the $H\rightarrow WW^{*}$ branching ratio for the $p_T^V$ scheme.

Measured cross sections times the $H\rightarrow WW^{*}$ branching ratio for the STXS scheme. Note: the uncertainties of "-0" are due to the confidence interval reaching the minimum allowed value of the POI.

Correlation matrix of the POIs and normalisation factors for the 2-POI inclusive analysis

Correlation matrix of the parameters of interest, normalisation factors and nuissance parameters for the $p_T^V$ scheme

Correlation matrix of the parameters of interest, normalisation factors and nuissance parameters for the STXS scheme

Event data from Z-dominated SR