Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $W\mu\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured dilepton invariant mass distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured transverse mass distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured dilepton invariant mass distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of $E_{T}^{miss}$ for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of leading jet $p_{T}$ for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_{T}$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ for SR9 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for SR9 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Observed and expected 95$\%$ CL limit on the fundamental Planck scale in $4+n$ dimensions, $M_D$, as a function of the number of extra dimensions. In the figure the two results overlap. The shaded areas around the expected limit indicate the expected $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ ranges of limits in the absence of a signal. The 95$\%$ CL observed limits after the suppression of the events with $\hat{s} > M_D^2$ is applied (truncated) are also given.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the scalar operator D1. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the vector operator D5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the axial vector operator D8. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the tensor operator D9. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the gluon operator D11. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the gluon operator C5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Observed 95% CL limits on the suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass Mmed, assuming a Z'-like boson in a simplified model and a DM mass of 50 GeV and 400 GeV. The width of the mediator is varied between Mmed/3 and Mmed/8pi.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of couplings of the simplified model vertex in the plane of mediator and WIMP mass (Mmed versus m_chi).

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-independent interactions, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-dependent interactions, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon annihilation cross section as a function of m_chi, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for degenerate squark/gluino masses.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 1/2 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 1/4 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 2 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 4 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

Observed and expected 95$\%$ CL upper limit on $\sigma \times {\rm{BR}}(H \to {\rm{invisible}})$ as a function of the Higgs boson mass.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the scalar operator C1. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

The effective mass distribution in 3-jet signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 4-jet (W) signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 4-jet very-loose and loose signal regions.

The effective mass distribution in 4-jet medium signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 4-jet tight signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 5-jet signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 6-jet loose and medium signal regions.

The effective mass distribution in 6-jet tight signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 6-jet very-tight signal region.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Observed limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=395GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=395GeV).

Observed limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=695GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=695GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Observed CLs contour for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with plus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with minus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with plus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with minus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with plus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with minus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

First of two expected CLs contours with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Second of two expected CLs contours with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with plus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with minus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Signal region for points.

Signal region for points.

Signal region for points (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Signal region for points (m_chi^0_1=395GeV).

Signal region for points (m_chi^0_1=695GeV).

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for pair-produced gluinos decaying directly.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for associated gluino-squark production.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for pair-produced squarks decaying directly.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Signal region for points.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for pair-produced gluinos decaying via stops into top+charm+neutralino1.

Production cross-section in PB.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jW.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jW.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jW.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR3j.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR3j.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR3j.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jW.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jW.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jW.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jl-.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jl-.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jl-.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR5j.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR5j.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR5j.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jt+.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jt+.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jt+.

Production cross-section in PB.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jW.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jW.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jW.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR3j.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR3j.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR3j.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jW.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jW.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jW.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jl-.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jl-.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jl-.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR5j.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR5j.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR5j.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jt+.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jt+.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jt+.

Distribution of the missing ET for data and the SM expectation in the one-lepton plus 2 jet channel.

Observed 95 PCT exclusion limit in the M(gluino), M(sbottom) plane obtained with the zero-lepton channel data.

Expected 95 PCT exclusion limit in the M(gluino), M(sbottom) plane obtained with the zero-lepton channel data.

Observed and expected 95 PCT CL upper limits on the gluino-mediated and stop pair production cross section as a function of the gluino mass for a stop mass od 180 GeV, for the one-lepton analysis.

Observed and expected 95 PCT CL upper limits on the gluino-mediated and stop pair production cross section as a function of the gluino mass for a stop mass od 210 GeV, for the one-lepton analysis.

Observed 95 PCT CL exclusion limits from the zero-lepton analysis on the MSUGRA/CMSSM scenario with tan(beta) = 40, A0 = 0 and MU > 0.

Expected 95 PCT CL exclusion limits from the zero-lepton analysis on the MSUGRA/CMSSM scenario with tan(beta) = 40, A0 = 0 and MU > 0.

Observed 95 PCT CL exclusion limits from the one-lepton analysis on the MSUGRA/CMSSM scenario with tan(beta) = 40, A0 = 0 and MU > 0.

Expected 95 PCT CL exclusion limits from the one-lepton analysis on the MSUGRA/CMSSM scenario with tan(beta) = 40, A0 = 0 and MU > 0.

Observed 95 PCT CL exclusion limits from the combined zero and one-lepton analyses on the MSUGRA/CMSSM scenario with tan(beta) = 40, A0 = 0 and MU > 0.

Expected 95 PCT CL exclusion limits from the combined zero and one-lepton analyses on the MSUGRA/CMSSM scenario with tan(beta) = 40, A0 = 0 and MU > 0.

95 PCT confidence lower limits to M(1/2).