Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the hadronic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})$ in the muon channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})|$ in the muon channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})|$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ in the muon channel.The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ in the muon channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $m(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ in the muon channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $m(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the hadronic pseudo-top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ after the electron and muon channel combination. The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 11(a).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the hadronic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ after the electron and muon channel combination. The results shown in this table correspond to the results presentedin figure 12(a).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of theleptonic pseudo-top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})$ after the electron and muon channel combination.The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 11(b).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertaintyas a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})|$ after the electron and muon channel combination.The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 12(b).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function ofthe pseudo-top-quark-pair $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ after the electron and muon channel combination.The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 13(a).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ after the electron and muon channel combination.The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 13(b).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $m(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$after the electron and muon channel combination. The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 13(c).

Selection acceptance times efficiency as a function of WPRIME mass at truth level for left- and right-handed WPRIME MC. The total efficiency curves correspond to the sum of the efficiencies of the one b-tag and two b-tag categories.

Cutflow (efficiency with respect to total number of events in %) for several WPRIME masses in the left-handed and in the right-handed model for hadronic top-quark decays.

Overview of the signal acceptance times efficiency (A x Eff) for the hadronic top-quark decay for both categories, the predicted cross section times branching ratio to TOP BOTTOM, as well as the observed 95% CL limit on the cross section times branching ratio for several WPRIME masses in the left-handed and in the right-handed model. The expected signal event yields in the two categories for 20.3 fb-1 of 8 TeV data are also shown.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Integrated jet shape as a function of the radius r for the PT range 40-50 GeV.

Differential jet shape as a function of the radius r for the PT range 50-70 GeV.

Integrated jet shape as a function of the radius r for the PT range 50-70 GeV.

Differential jet shape as a function of the radius r for the PT range 70-100 GeV.

Integrated jet shape as a function of the radius r for the PT range 70-100 GeV.

Differential jet shape as a function of the radius r for the PT range 100-150 GeV.

Integrated jet shape as a function of the radius r for the PT range 100-150 GeV.

(1) Number of generated MC events for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid (2) Relative Cross section uncertainties for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid.

(1) Acceptance of the same flavour selection for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid (2) Selection efficiency of the same flavour selection for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid (3) Product of the acceptance and efficiency of the same flavour selection for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid (4) Relative experimental uncertainties on the acceptance times efficiency of the same flavour selection for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid.

(1) Acceptance of the different flavour selection for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid (2) Selection efficiency of the different flavour selection for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid (3) Product of the acceptance and efficiency of the different flavour selection for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid (4) Relative experimental uncertainties on the acceptance times efficiency of the different flavour selection for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid.

(1) Observed CLs values for the scalar top signal grid (2) Expected CLs values for the scalar top signal grid.

(1) Observed CLs values for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid (2) Expected CLs values for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid.

Cross section limits [pb] for the scalar top signal grid.

Cross section limits [pb] for the spin 1/2 top partner signal grid.

Observed 95% CL limit for stop grid as a function of the scalar top and neutralino masses.

Observed 95% CL limit for stop grid as a function of the scalar top and neutralino masses, varying signal cross section of +1sigma.

Observed 95% CL limit for stop grid as a function of the scalar top and neutralino masses, varying signal cross section of -1sigma.

Expected 95% CL limit for stop grid as a function of the scalar top and neutralino masses.

Expected 95% CL limit for stop grid as a function of the scalar top and neutralino masses, varying the uncertainty of +1sigma.

Expected 95% CL limit for stop grid as a function of the scalar top and neutralino masses, varying the uncertainty of -1sigma.

Observed 95% CL limit for top partner grid as a function of the top partner and neutralino masses.

Observed 95% CL limit for top partner grid as a function of the top partner and neutralino masses, varying signal cross section of +1sigma.

Observed 95% CL limit for top partner grid as a function of the top partner and neutralino masses, varying signal cross section of -1sigma.

Expected 95% CL limit for top partner grid as a function of the top partner and neutralino masses.

Expected 95% CL limit for top partner grid as a function of the top partner and neutralino masses, varying the uncertainty of +1sigma.

Expected 95% CL limit for top partner grid as a function of the top partner and neutralino masses, varying the uncertainty of -1sigma.

Observed 95 PCT exclusion limit in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Expected 95 PCT exclusion limit in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Observed 95 PCT exclusion limit in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Number of MC signal events in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Number of MC signal events in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Number of MC signal events in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Cross section in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Cross section in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Cross section in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Acceptance in the 1LSR signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Acceptance in the 1LSR signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Efficiency in the 1LSR signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Efficiency in the 1LSR signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 1LSR region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 1LSR region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Acceptance in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Acceptance in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Efficiency in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Efficiency in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Acceptance in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Acceptance in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Efficiency in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Efficiency in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR1 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR2 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Acceptance in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Acceptance in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Efficiency in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Efficiency in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 1LSR region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values for the 1LSR region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR1 regions in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR1 regions in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR2 regions in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR2 regions in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values for the 1LSR region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 1LSR region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR1 regions in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR1 regions in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR2 regions in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR2 regions in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

expected CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

observed CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.