Observed 95% $\text{CL}_\text{S}$ upper limits on the production cross-section times acceptance times branching ratio to jets, $\sigma \cdot A \cdot \text{BR}$, of Gaussian-shaped signals of 5%, 10%, and 15% width relative to their peak mass, $m_G$. Also included are the corresponding expected upper limits predicted for the case the $m_{jj}$ distribution is observed to be identical to the background prediction in each bin and the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ envelopes of outcomes expected for Poisson fluctuations around the background expectation. Limits are derived from the J100 signal region.

Observed 95% $\text{CL}_\text{S}$ upper limits on the the value of the coupling to quarks, $g_q$, of the $Z^\prime$ model as a function of the resonance mass $m_{Z^\prime}$. Also included are the corresponding expected upper limits predicted for the case the $m_{jj}$ distribution is observed to be identical to the background prediction in each bin and the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ envelopes of outcomes expected for Poisson fluctuations around the background expectation. Limits are derived from the J50 signal region.

Observed 95% $\text{CL}_\text{S}$ upper limits on the the value of the coupling to quarks, $g_q$, of the $Z^\prime$ model as a function of the resonance mass $m_{Z^\prime}$. Also included are the corresponding expected upper limits predicted for the case the $m_{jj}$ distribution is observed to be identical to the background prediction in each bin and the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ envelopes of outcomes expected for Poisson fluctuations around the background expectation. Limits are derived from the J100 signal region.

Acceptance of simulated $Z^\prime$ signal events given the analysis event selection as a function of $m_{Z^\prime}$. The solid black line corresponds to the acceptance without a lower $m_{jj}$ requirement applied, the solid blue line includes the $m_{jj} > 344$ GeV requirement of the J50 signal region, and the solid red line includes the $m_{jj} > 481$ GeV requirement of the J100 signal region.

Numbers of events in each of the two considered datasets after consecutively applying the analysis selections.

Single Event Sensitivity (SES) for the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X$ search as a function of X mass.

Model-independent constraints on the branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X$ decay

Model-independent constraints on the branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X$ decay

Observed model-independent upper limits at 90 % CL of $\mathcal{B}(K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X)$ as function of $X$ mass, for several $X$ lifetime hypotheses, assuming $X$ decays to visible SM particles.

Observed model-independent upper limits at 90 % CL of $\mathcal{B}(K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X)$ as function of $X$ mass, for several $X$ lifetime hypotheses, assuming $X$ decays to visible SM particles.

Di-muon mass spectrum of selected $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ events from 2017–2018 data.

Di-muon mass spectrum of selected $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ events from 2017–2018 data.

Expected and observed model-independent upper limits at 90 % CL for $\mathcal{B}(K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X)\times\mathcal{B}(X\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ as a function of $m_{X}$ for $\tau_{X}=0$.

Expected and observed model-independent upper limits at 90 % CL for $\mathcal{B}(K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X)\times\mathcal{B}(X\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ as a function of $m_{X}$ for $\tau_{X}=0$.

Observed model-independent upper limits at 90 % CL for $\mathcal{B}(K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X)\times\mathcal{B}(X\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ for several $\tau_{X}$ values.

Observed model-independent upper limits at 90 % CL for $\mathcal{B}(K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X)\times\mathcal{B}(X\rightarrow\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ for several $\tau_{X}$ values.

Branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}A^{\prime}$ decay divided by the kinetic mixing coupling squared, $\varepsilon^{2}$, as a function of $m_{A^{\prime}}$ for the BC2 model with dark photon $A^{\prime}$.

Branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}A^{\prime}$ decay divided by the kinetic mixing coupling squared, $\varepsilon^{2}$, as a function of $m_{A^{\prime}}$ for the BC2 model with dark photon $A^{\prime}$.

Excluded region, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{A^{\prime}},\varepsilon)$ for a dark photon $A^{\prime}$, decaying invisibly, in the BC2 model for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded region, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{A^{\prime}},\varepsilon)$ for a dark photon $A^{\prime}$, decaying invisibly, in the BC2 model for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded region, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{A^{\prime}},\varepsilon)$ for a dark photon $A^{\prime}$, decaying invisibly, in the BC2 model for the NA62 $\pi^{0}\rightarrow{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded region, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{A^{\prime}},\varepsilon)$ for a dark photon $A^{\prime}$, decaying invisibly, in the BC2 model for the NA62 $\pi^{0}\rightarrow{\rm inv}$ search.

Branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}S$ decay divided by $\text{sin}^{2}\theta$, as a function of $m_{S}$.

Branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}S$ decay divided by $\text{sin}^{2}\theta$, as a function of $m_{S}$.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{S},\rm{sin}^{2}\theta)$ for a dark scalar $S$, in the BC4-inv model for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{S},\rm{sin}^{2}\theta)$ for a dark scalar $S$, in the BC4-inv model for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{S},\rm{sin}^{2}\theta)$ for a dark scalar $S$, in the BC4-inv model for the NA62 $\pi^{0}\rightarrow{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{S},\rm{sin}^{2}\theta)$ for a dark scalar $S$, in the BC4-inv model for the NA62 $\pi^{0}\rightarrow{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{S},\rm{sin}^{2}\theta$) for a dar scalar S, in the BC4 model, from the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{S},\rm{sin}^{2}\theta$) for a dar scalar S, in the BC4 model, from the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{S},\rm{sin}^{2}\theta$) for a dar scalar S, in the BC4 model, from the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ study.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{S},\rm{sin}^{2}\theta$) for a dar scalar S, in the BC4 model, from the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ study.

Branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}a$ decay divided by $(C_{ff}/\Lambda)^{2}$, as a function of $m_{a}$, assuming Λ = 1 TeV.

Branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}a$ decay divided by $(C_{ff}/\Lambda)^{2}$, as a function of $m_{a}$, assuming Λ = 1 TeV.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10-inv model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10-inv model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10-inv model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, for the NA62 $\pi^{0}\rightarrow\rm{inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10-inv model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, for the NA62 $\pi^{0}\rightarrow\rm{inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV for the NA62 $\pi^{0}\rightarrow\rm{inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV for the NA62 $\pi^{0}\rightarrow\rm{inv}$ search.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ study.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{ff}/\lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, in the BC10 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV for the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ study.

Branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}a$ decay divided by $(C_{GG}/\Lambda)^{2}$, as a function of $m_{a}$, assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV.

Branching ratio of the $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}a$ decay divided by $(C_{GG}/\Lambda)^{2}$, as a function of $m_{a}$, assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{GG}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, of the BC11 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, from the NA62 search for $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{GG}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, of the BC11 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, from the NA62 search for $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}X_{\rm inv}$.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{GG}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, of the BC11 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, from the NA62 search for $\pi^{0}\rightarrow\rm{inv}$.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{GG}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, of the BC11 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, from the NA62 search for $\pi^{0}\rightarrow\rm{inv}$.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{GG}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, of the BC11 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, from the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\gamma\gamma$ study.

Excluded regions, at 90 % CL, of the parameter space $(m_{a}, C_{GG}/\Lambda)$ for an ALP $a$, of the BC11 model, evaluated assuming $\Lambda = 1$ TeV, from the NA62 $K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\gamma\gamma$ study.

Normalized $p_{\mathrm{T}}$-spectrum ratio as a function as a function of centrality in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}} \in$ $0.5 \leq |\eta|\leq 0.8$.

Normalized $p_{\mathrm{T}}$-spectrum ratio as a function as a function of centrality in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{tracklets}} \in$ $0.5 \leq |\eta|\leq 0.8$.

Normalized $p_{\mathrm{T}}$-spectrum ratio as a function as a function of centrality in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}} \in$ $-3.7<\eta<-1.7$ and $2.8 < \eta <5.1$.

Event fraction distribution as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}} \in -3.7<\eta<-1.7$ and $2.8 < \eta <5.1$.

Event fraction distribution as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}} \in |\eta|\leq 0.8$.

Event fraction distribution as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}} \in |\eta|\leq 0.8$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $0.5 \leq |\eta| \leq 0.8$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ $\in$ $0.5 \leq |\eta| \leq 0.8$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{tracklets}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{tracklets}}$ $\in$ $0.5 \leq |\eta| \leq 0.8$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{tracklets}}$ $\in$ $0.3 \leq |\eta| \leq 0.6$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{tracklets}}$ $\in$ $0.7 \leq |\eta| \leq 1$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $-3.7<\eta<-1.7$ and $2.8 < \eta <5.1$.

Extracted $c_{\mathrm{s}}^{2}$ as a function of the minimum pseudorapidity gap between the centrality estimation and transverse-momentum spectra measurement in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$.

$k_{2}/k_{2}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$k_{2}/k_{2}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$k_{2}/k_{2}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $-3.7<\eta<-1.7$ and $2.8 < \eta <5.1$.

$k_{3}/k_{3}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$k_{3}/k_{3}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$k_{3}/k_{3}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $-3.7<\eta<-1.7$ and $2.8 < \eta <5.1$.

$\gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$\gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$\gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $-3.7<\eta<-1.7$ and $2.8 < \eta <5.1$.

$\Gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\Gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$\Gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\Gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] angle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$\Gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\Gamma_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $-3.7<\eta<-1.7$ and $2.8 < \eta <5.1$.

$\kappa_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\kappa_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$\kappa_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\kappa_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ $\in$ $|\eta| \leq 0.8$.

$\kappa_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}/\kappa_{\langle [p_{\mathrm{T}}] \rangle}^{0-5\%}$ as a function of $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $-3.7<\eta<-1.7$ and $2.8 < \eta <5.1$.

Correlation between $\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle / \langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ and $\langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle / \langle \mathrm{d}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta \rangle ^{\mathrm{0-5\%}}$ in $\mathrm{Pb}-\mathrm{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$. Data points are shown for centrality estimator based on $N_{\mathrm{ch}}$ $\in$ $0.5 \leq |\eta| \leq 0.8$ with $0.45 \leq p_{\mathrm{T}} \leq 50~\mathrm{GeV}/c.$.

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.

The extracted kinetic decoupling temperature is derived from $\pi^{-}$–d correlation functions.

This is the mixed event distribution for $\pi^{+}$–d, required for the fitting

This is the mixed event distribution for $\pi^{-}$–d, required for the fitting

The momentum smearing matrix, required for the fitting, used both for $\pi^{-}$–d and $\pi^{+}$–d

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.