Summary of results for cross-section of prompt psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(1S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(2S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(3S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of J/psi decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of J/psi decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapdiity in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapdiity in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(nS) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(nS) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of non-prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of non-prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of Upsilon(1S) in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of Upsilon(1S) in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of quarkonia (prompt J/psi, non-prompt J/psi, prompt psi(2S), Upsilon(1S)) to RpPb of Z ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for quarkonia self-normalized yields in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of self-normalized event activity. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for prompt Psi(2S) to J/psi double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapidity. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for Upsilon(2S) and Upsilon(3S) to Upsilon(1S) double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for prompt Psi(2S) and J/psi double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for Upsilon(2S) and Upsilon(3S) to Upsilon(1S) double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Most probable charge deposit signal normalised to that of minimum ionising particles as a function of $\beta\gamma$ for cosmic-ray muons (dE/dx). Statistical uncertainties as vertical error bars. Uncertainties in momentum and thus $\beta \gamma$ determination are drawn as horizontal error bars.

Most probable charge deposit signal normalised to that of minimum ionising particles as a function of $\beta\gamma$ for cosmic-ray muons (dE/dx + TR). Statistical uncertainties as vertical error bars. Uncertainties in momentum and thus $\beta \gamma$ determination are drawn as horizontal error bars.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collisions energy dependence of $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collisions energy dependence of $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collisions energy dependence of $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA550 signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRB signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRC signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L- best expected signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA300-2j signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA450 signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA600 signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA750 signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRB signal region.

Signal acceptance (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L- best expected signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA350 signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA450 signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRA550 signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRB signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L-SRC signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino, for the b0L- best expected signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA300-2j signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA450 signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA600 signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRA750 signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L-SRB signal region.

Signal efficiency (in %) in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino, for the b1L- best expected signal region.

b1L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.

b0L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.

combined signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the asymmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino or top quark and chargino.

b0L signal region with best expected exclusion limit in the ( M(SBOTTOM), M(NEUTRALINO) ) mass plane for the symmetric decay of the sbottom into bottom quark and neutralino.

Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA350 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRA550 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRA550 for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for b0L-SRC for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Observed exclusion limit for b0L-SRC for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Expected exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Observed exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with symmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino.

Expected exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for best b0L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA300-2j for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA300-2j for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA450 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA600 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA600 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRA750 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRA750 for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for b1L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for b1L-SRB for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for best b1L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for best b1L SR for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for A-LowMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for A-LowMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for A-HighMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for A-HighMass combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for B combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for B combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Expected exclusion limit for best combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

Observed exclusion limit for best combination for sbottom pair production with asymmetric decay into a bottom quark and a neutralino or a top quark and a chargino.

$m_{\mathrm{CT}}$ distribution in b0L-SRA. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.

$\mathrm{min[m_{T}(jet_{1-4}, E_{T}^{miss})]}$ distribution in b0L-SRB. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.

${\cal A}$ distribution in b0L-SRC. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.

$\mathrm{m_{bb}}$ distribution in b1L-SRA300-2j. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.

$\mathrm{m_{eff}}$ distribution in b1L-SRA. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.

$\mathrm{m_{T}}$ distribution in b1L-SRB. All selection criteria are applied, except the selection on the variable that is displayed in the plot. The SM backgrounds are normalized to the values determined in the fit. The last bin includes overflows.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b0L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA350 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA550 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRC as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with symmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b0L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA350 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b0L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best b1L SR as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA300-2j as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA450 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA600 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRA750 as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for b1L-SRB as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for best combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for A-LowMass combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for A-HighMass combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cross section excluded at 95% CL for B combination as a function of the sbottom and neutralino masses, for a pair produced sbottom with asymmetric decay into a bottom and a neutralino or a top and a chargino.

Cutflow table in b0L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 1 TeV decaying into a 1 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.

Cutflow table in b0L-SRB for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 450 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.

Cutflow table in b0L-SRC for a pair produced bottom squark of 450 GeV decaying into a 430 GeV neutralino in a symmetric decay scenario.

Cutflow table in b1L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.

Cutflow table in b1L-SRA300-2j for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.

Cutflow table in b0L-SRA for a pair produced bottom squark of 700 GeV decaying into a 300 GeV neutralino in a mixed decay scenario.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino one-step variable-x model.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step x = 1/2 model.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step x = 1/2 model.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step variable-x model.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the squark one-step variable-x model.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino two-step model.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the gluino two-step model.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contours for pMSSM model.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contours for pMSSM model.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 2J b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J low-x b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J high-x b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 6J b-veto signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 2J b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J low-x b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 4J high-x b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 6J b-tag signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in 9J signal regions after fit. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 2J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J low-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 4J high-x b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-veto signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 6J b-tag signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

$m_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution for events satisfying all the 9J signal region selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure. The uncertainty bands plotted include all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The dashed lines stand for the benchmark signal samples.

Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.

Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino one-step variable-x model.

Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.

Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for squark one-step variable-x model.

Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for gluino two-step model.

Observed upper limits on the signal cross-section for pMSSM model.

Acceptance in 2J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.

Acceptance in 2J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.

Acceptance in 4J low-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.

Acceptance in 4J low-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.

Acceptance in 4J high-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.

Acceptance in 4J high-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.

Acceptance in 6J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.

Acceptance in 6J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.

Acceptance in 9J discovery signal region for pMSSM model.

Acceptance in 9J discovery signal region for gluino two-step model.

Efficiency in 2J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.

Efficiency in 2J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.

Efficiency in 4J low-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.

Efficiency in 4J low-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.

Efficiency in 4J high-x discovery signal region for gluino one-step variable-x model.

Efficiency in 4J high-x discovery signal region for squark one-step variable-x model.

Efficiency in 6J discovery signal region for gluino one-step x = 1/2 model.

Efficiency in 6J discovery signal region for squark one-step x = 1/2 model.

Efficiency in 9J discovery signal region for pMSSM model.

Efficiency in 9J discovery signal region for gluino two-step model.

Cutflow table for the 2J discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).

Cutflow table for the 4J high-x discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).

Cutflow table for the 4J low-x discovery signal region (targetting gluino decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).

Cutflow table for the 4J low-x discovery signal region (targetting squark decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).

Cutflow table for the 6J discovery signal region (targetting gluino decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).

Cutflow table for the 6J discovery signal region (targetting squark decays) with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).

Cutflow table for the 9J discovery signal region with a representative target signal model. The weighted numbers are normalized to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ and rounded to the statistical error. The selection called "Filter" is introduced for initial data reduction. It selects events with at least one soft electron or muon ($3.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for muons and $4.5 < p_\mathrm{T} < 25$ GeV for electrons) in which an $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ trigger has fired or events with at least one hard electron or muon ($p_\mathrm{T} >$25 GeV).

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution in the multi-jet background VR-F for SR-lowMass. The stacked histograms show the contribution of the non-multi-jet SM backgrounds from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The last bin in the left panels includes the overflow events.

The $E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution in the multi-jet background VR-F for SR-highMass. The stacked histograms show the contribution of the non-multi-jet SM backgrounds from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The last bin in the left panels includes the overflow events.

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution in the multi-jet background VR-F for SR-highMass. The stacked histograms show the contribution of the non-multi-jet SM backgrounds from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The last bin in the left panels includes the overflow events.

The $E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ distribution in the $W$-VR region. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The contribution of $W$+jets events is scaled to the fit result. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the $OS--SS$ method. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the SM background estimate. The last bin includes the overflow events.

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution in the $W$-VR region. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The contribution of $W$+jets events is scaled to the fit result. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the $OS--SS$ method. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the SM background estimate. The last bin includes the overflow events.

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution in the $Z$-VR region. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method, using CRs obtained with the same technique used for the SRs. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the SM background estimate. The last bin includes the overflow events except for the upper left panel.

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution in the Top-VR region. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method, using CRs obtained with the same technique used for the SRs. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the SM background estimate. The last bin includes the overflow events except for the upper left panel.

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution in the $WW$-VR region. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is negligible and not considered. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the SM background estimate. The last bin includes the overflow events except for the upper left panel.

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution in the $ZZ$-VR region. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is negligible and not considered. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the SM background estimate. The last bin includes the overflow events except for the upper left panel.

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution before the $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ requirement is applied for SR-lowMass region, where the arrow indicates the position of the cut in the signal region. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The contributions of multi-jet and $W$+jets events are scaled with the corresponding normalisation factors. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the total SM background estimate. The last bin includes the overflow events.

The $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ distribution before the $m_{\mathrm{T2}}$ requirement is applied for SR-highMass region, where the arrow indicates the position of the cut in the signal region. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The contributions of multi-jet and $W$+jets events are scaled with the corresponding normalisation factors. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the total SM background estimate. The last bin includes the overflow events.

Observed exclusion contours in chargino pair production model.

Expected exclusion contours in chargino pair production model.

Observed exclusion contours in chargino chargino and chargino neutralino production model.

Expected exclusion contours in chargino chargino and chargino neutralino production model.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the chargino and neutralino masses in chargino chargino pair production.

Observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb as a function of the chargino and neutralino masses in chargino chargino and chargino neutralino pair production.

Best signal region used in chargino chargino and chargino neutralino pair production, H is corresponding to SR-highMass and L is SR-lowMass.

Observed CLs significance in variable-x model of chargino chargino pair production for compressed mass scenario.

Expected CLs significance in variable-x model of chargino chargino pair production for compressed mass scenario.

Observed CLs significance in variable-x model of chargino chargino pair production for large mass splitting scenario.

Expected CLs significance in variable-x model of chargino chargino pair production for large mass splitting scenario.

Observed CLs significance in variable-x model of chargino chargino and chargino neutralino pair production for compressed mass scenario.

Expected CLs significance in variable-x model of chargino chargino and chargino neutralino pair production for compressed mass scenario.

Observed CLs significance in variable-x model of chargino chargino and chargino neutralino pair production for large mass splitting scenario.

Expected CLs significance in variable-x model of chargino chargino and chargino neutralino pair production for large mass splitting scenario.

Acceptance in SR-lowMass for CHARGINO1 NEUTRALINO2 production.

Acceptance in SR-highMass for CHARGINO1 NEUTRALINO2 production.

Acceptance in SR-highMass for CHARGINO1 CHARGINO1 production.

Efficiency in SR-lowMass for CHARGINO1 NEUTRALINO2 production.

Efficiency in SR-highMass for CHARGINO1 NEUTRALINO2 production.

Efficiency in SR-highMass for CHARGINO1 CHARGINO1 production.

Cut flow for the reference point 1 (CHARGINO1 NEUTRALINO2 production) in SR-lowMass. The column labelled $N_{raw}$ shows the results for the generated number of events, while $N_{weighted}$ includes all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$. The quoted uncertainties are statistical only. At the step ``at least two medium tau candidates, matched to trigger objects' the following requirements are applied: the event is recorded using either the asymmetric di-tau trigger or the di-tau+$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ trigger, and the two matched tau candidates must be of medium quality. If the event has been selected by the asymmetric di-tau trigger, the two tau candidates are required to have ${p}_{\mathrm{T}, \tau_1}>$ 95 GeV and ${p}_{\mathrm{T}, \tau_2}>$ 65 GeV. If the event has been selected by the di-tau+$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ trigger, the two tau candidates are required to have ${p}_{\mathrm{T}, \tau_1}>$ 50 GeV, ${p}_{\mathrm{T}, \tau_2}>$ 40 GeV, and $E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ > 150 GeV is required.}

Cut flow for the reference point 2 (CHARGINO1 CHARGINO1 production) in SR-highMass. The column labelled $N_{raw}$ shows the results for the generated number of events, while $N_{weighted}$ includes all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 36.1 fb$^{-1}$. The quoted uncertainties are statistical only. At the step ``at least two medium tau candidates, matched to trigger objects' the following requirements are applied: the event is recorded using either the asymmetric di-tau trigger or the di-tau+$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ trigger, and the two matched tau candidates must be of medium quality. If the event has been selected by the asymmetric di-tau trigger, the two tau candidates are required to have ${p}_{\mathrm{T}, \tau_1}>$ 95 GeV and ${p}_{\mathrm{T}, \tau_2}>$ 65 GeV. If the event has been selected by the di-tau+$E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ trigger, the two tau candidates are required to have ${p}_{\mathrm{T}, \tau_1}>$ 50 GeV, ${p}_{\mathrm{T}, \tau_2}>$ 40 GeV, and $E_{\mathrm T}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ > 150 GeV is required.}

Dijet mass distributions for data in the (a) WW signal region.

Dijet mass distributions for data in the (b) WZ signal region.

Dijet mass distributions for data in the (c) ZZ signal region.

Dijet mass distributions for data in the (d) WZ+WW signal region.

Dijet mass distributions for data in the (e) WW+ZZ signal region.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for WW+WZ production as a function of V' mass

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for WW+ZZ production as a function of GKK mass for the bulk RS model with k/M̄Pl=1.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for (c) WW+ZZ production as a function of scalar mass.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for WW production as a function of V' mass

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for WZ production as a function of V' mass

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for WW production as a function of GKK mass for the bulk RS model with k/M̄Pl=0.5.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for ZZ production as a function of GKK mass for the bulk RS model with k/M̄Pl=0.5.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for WW production as a function of GKK mass for the bulk RS model with k/M̄Pl=1.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for ZZ production as a function of GKK mass for the bulk RS model with k/M̄Pl=1.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for WW+ZZ production as a function of GKK mass for the bulk RS model with k/M̄Pl=0.5.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for WW production as a function of scalar mass.

Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio for ZZ production as a function of scalar mass.

Two-body selection distribution of $R_{2\ell 2j}$ in $CR^{2-body}_{VV-SF}$ after the background fits. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection distribution of $E_{T,corr}^{miss}$ in $CR_{ttZ}$ after the background fits. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection distribution of $E_{T,corr}^{miss}$ in $CR_{VZ}$ after the background fits. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection background fit results for the CRs of the SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ and SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ background fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds (ttbar, $VV$-DF and $VV$-SF) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs.Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Entries marked ``--'' indicate a negligible background contribution. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in $CR^{3-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $cos\theta_{b}$ in $CR^{3-body}_{VV-DF}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ in $CR^{3-body}_{VV-SF}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Four-body selection background fit results for the CRs of the SR$^{4-body}$ background fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $VV$ and $Z_{\tau\tau}$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Four-body selection distributions of the $p_{T}(j_1)$ in CR$^{4-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Four-body selection distributions of the $R_{2\ell}$ in CR$^{4-body}_{VV}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Four-body selection distributions of the $E^{miss}_{T}$ in CR$^{4-body}_{Z\tau\tau}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection background fit results for SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ and SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $t\bar t Z$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t t$, $t\bar t t\bar t$, $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Entries marked $--$ indicate a negligible background contribution. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Two-body selection background fit results for SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $t\bar t Z$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t t$, $t\bar t t\bar t$, $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Entries marked $--$ indicate a negligible background contribution. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection background fit results for SR(A,B)$^{2-body}_{x,y}$ regions, where x and y denote the low and high edges of the bin. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric.

Three-body selection background fit results for SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ and SR$^{3-body}_{t}$. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in same-flavour events that satisfy all the SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ selection criteria except for the one on $R_{p_{T}}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in different-flavour events that satisfy all the SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ selection criteria except for the one on $R_{p_{T}}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Three-body selection distributions of $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ in same-flavour events that satisfy all the SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ selection criteria except for the one on $M_{\Delta}^{R}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Three-body selection distributions of $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ in different-flavour events that satisfy all the SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ selection criteria except for the one on $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Four-body selection distributions of $R_{2\ell 4j}$ for events satisfying all the SR$^{4-body}$ selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Four-body selection distributions of $R_{2\ell}$ for events satisfying all the SR$^{4-body}$ selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Four-body selection background fit results for SR$^{4-body}$. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t \bar t$, $VV$ and $Z_{\tau\tau}$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t $, $t\bar t t\bar t$ , $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Model-independent 95% CL upper limits on the visible cross-section ($\sigma_{vis}$) of new physics, the visible number of signal events ($S^{95}_{\rm obs}$), the visible number of signal events ($S^{95}_{\rm exp}$) given the expected number of background events (and $\pm1\sigma$ excursions on the expectation), and the discovery $p$-value ($p(s = 0)$), all calculated with pseudo-experiments, are shown for each SR.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for a simplified model assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for a simplified model assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the analysis of $36.1 \; \text{fb}^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data as a function of the mass of the $\tilde{t}_1$ for a fixed $(\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0$ GeV, assuming $\text{BR}(\tilde{\chi}^0_2 \to Z\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0.5$ and $\text{BR}(\tilde{\chi}^0_2 \to h\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0.5$.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the analysis of $36.1 \; \text{fb}^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data as a function of the mass of the $\tilde{t}_1$ for a fixed $(\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0$ GeV, assuming $\text{BR}(\tilde{\chi}^0_2 \to Z\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0.5$ and $\text{BR}(\tilde{\chi}^0_2 \to h\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0.5$.

Expected exclusion contour as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}$ in the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_1$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ are considered. Limits are set for both the positive (red in the figure) and negative (blue in the figure) values of $\mu$. The dashed and dotted grey lines indicate constant values of the $\tilde{b}_1$ mass. The signal models included within the shown contours are excluded at 95% CL. The dashed lines and the shaded band are the expected limit and its $\pm1\sigma$ uncertainty. The thick solid line is the observed limit for the central value of the signal cross-section. The expected and observed limits do not include the effect of the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Observed exclusion contour as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}$ in the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_1$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ are considered. Limits are set for both the positive (red in the figure) and negative (blue in the figure) values of $\mu$. The dashed and dotted grey lines indicate constant values of the $\tilde{b}_1$ mass. The signal models included within the shown contours are excluded at 95% CL. The dashed lines and the shaded band are the expected limit and its $\pm1\sigma$ uncertainty. The thick solid line is the observed limit for the central value of the signal cross-section. The expected and observed limits do not include the effect of the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Expected exclusion contour as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}$ in the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_1$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ are considered. Limits are set for both the positive (red in the figure) and negative (blue in the figure) values of $\mu$. The dashed and dotted grey lines indicate constant values of the $\tilde{b}_1$ mass. The signal models included within the shown contours are excluded at 95% CL. The dashed lines and the shaded band are the expected limit and its $\pm1\sigma$ uncertainty. The thick solid line is the observed limit for the central value of the signal cross-section. The expected and observed limits do not include the effect of the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Observed exclusion contour as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}$ in the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_1$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ are considered. Limits are set for both the positive (red in the figure) and negative (blue in the figure) values of $\mu$. The dashed and dotted grey lines indicate constant values of the $\tilde{b}_1$ mass. The signal models included within the shown contours are excluded at 95% CL. The dashed lines and the shaded band are the expected limit and its $\pm1\sigma$ uncertainty. The thick solid line is the observed limit for the central value of the signal cross-section. The expected and observed limits do not include the effect of the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Illustration of the best expected signal region per signal grid point for the simplified model assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

Two-body selection background fit results for the VR in the SRA$^{2-body}$ and SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ background-only fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $t\bar t Z$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t t$, $t\bar t t\bar t$, $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty reaches down to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Two-body selection background fit results for the VR in the SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ background-only fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $t\bar t Z$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t t$, $t\bar t t\bar t$, $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty reaches down to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Three-body selection background fit results for the VRs in the SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ and SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ background-only fits. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $VV$ and $Z_{\tau\tau}$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t $, $t\bar t t\bar t$ , $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty reaches down to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Four-body selection background fit results for the VRs in the SR$^{4-body}$ background-only fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $VV$ and $Z_{\tau\tau}$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t $, $t\bar t t\bar t$ , $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty reaches down to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Two-body selection distribution of $E_{T}^{miss}$ for events satisfying all the VR$^{2-body}_{VV-DF}$ selections, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection distribution of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying all the VR$^{2-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ selections, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection distribution of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying all the VR$^{2-body}_{t\bar{t},3j}$ selections, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ in events that satisfy all the $VR^{3-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ selection criteria after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in events that satisfy all the $VR^{3-body}_{VV-SF}$ selection criteria after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in events that satisfy all the $VR^{3-body}_{VV-DF}$ selection criteria after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Four-body selection distributions of $R_{2\ell 4j}$ for events with at least 2 jets (with the two leading required not be identified as $b$-jets), a leading jet $p_{T} >150$ GeV and satisfying the SR$^{4-body}$ requirements on the leptons. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The fake and non-prompt lepton backgrounds are estimated from data, the other backgrounds are estimated from MC simulation with a background fit as described in Section6. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. In order to enhance the contribution from fake or non-prompt leptons, the lepton pair is required to have the same charge.

Four-body selection distributions of $R_{2\ell}$ for events with at least 2 jets (with the two leading required not be identified as $b$-jets), a leading jet $p_{T} >150$ GeV and satisfying the SR$^{4-body}$ requirements on the leptons. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The fake and non-prompt lepton backgrounds are estimated from data, the other backgrounds are estimated from MC simulation with a background fit as described in Section6. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. In order to enhance the contribution from fake or non-prompt leptons, the lepton pair is required to have the same charge.

Four-body selection distributions of $E^{miss}_{T}$ for events satisfying all the VR$^{4-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ selections, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The fake and non-prompt lepton backgrounds are estimated from data, the other backgrounds are estimated from MC simulation with a background fit as described in Section 6}. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Number of signal events selected at different stages for some scenarios in the $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ model.

Number of signal events selected at different stages for some scenarios in the $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ model.

Number of signal events selected at different stages for some scenarios in the $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b W \tilde{\chi}^{0}_1$ model.

Number of signal events selected at different stages for some scenarios in the $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b f f \prime \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ model.

Upper limits on cross-sections (in fb) at 95% CL for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t^{}(*)\tilde{\chi}^{0}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

Upper limits on cross-sections (in fb) at 95% CL for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio. The lightest chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1} = m_{\tilde{t}_1}-10$ GeV.

Upper limits on cross-sections (in fb) at 95% CL for each signal model, assuming the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_{1}$ and $\tilde{b}_{1}$ are considered. Limits are set for both positive (top) and negative (bottom) values of $\mu$.

Upper limits on cross-sections (in fb) at 95% CL for each signal model, assuming the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_{1}$ and $\tilde{b}_{1}$ are considered. Limits are set for both positive (top) and negative (bottom) values of $\mu$.

SRA$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Same Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{140,160}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{140,160}$ Same Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{160,180}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{160,180}$ Same Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ Same Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{4-body}$ acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b f f \prime \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{140,160}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{140,160}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{160,180}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{160,180}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{4-body}$ efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b f f \prime \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

Observed 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid when the signal cross section is decreased by one standard deviation.

Expected 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid.

Expected 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid with an up variation of the uncertainties.

Expected 95% CL limit for the pMSSM grid with a down variation of the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid.

Observed 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid when the signal cross section is increased by one standard deviation.

Observed 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid when the signal cross section is decreased by one standard deviation.

Expected 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid.

Expected 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid with an up variation of the uncertainties.

Expected 95% CL limit for the 2Step grid with a down variation of the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limit for the gtt off-shell grid.

Observed 95% CL limit for the gtt off-shell grid when the signal cross section is increased by one standard deviation.

Observed 95% CL limit for the gtt off-shell grid when the signal cross section is decreased by one standard deviation.

Expected 95% CL limit for the gtt off-shell grid.

Expected 95% CL limit for the gtt off-shell grid with an up variation of the uncertainties.

Expected 95% CL limit for the gtt off-shell grid with a down variation of the uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL limit for the RPV grid.

Observed 95% CL limit for the RPV grid when the signal cross section is increased by one standard deviation.

Observed 95% CL limit for the RPV grid when the signal cross section is decreased by one standard deviation.

Expected 95% CL limit for the RPV grid.

Expected 95% CL limit for the RPV grid with an up variation of the uncertainties.

Expected 95% CL limit for the RPV grid with a down variation of the uncertainties.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-7j80-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-7j80-1b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-7j80-2b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-8j80-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-8j80-1b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-8j80-2b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-9j80-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-9j80-1b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-9j80-2b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-8j50-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-8j50-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-8j50-1b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-8j50-2b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-9j50-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-9j50-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-9j50-1b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-9j50-2b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-10j50-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-10j50-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-10j50-1b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-10j50-2b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-11j50-0b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-11j50-1b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

Number of signal events expected for 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SR-11j50-2b in a pMSSM inspired model where m($\tilde{g}$) = 1400 GeV and m($\tilde{\chi}_{0}^{1}$) = 200 GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-8j50-0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-8j50-1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-8j50-2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-9j50-0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-9j50-1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-9j50-2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-10j50-0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-10j50-1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-10j50-2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-11j50-0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-11j50-1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-11j50-2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-7j80-0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-7j80-1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-7j80-2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-8j80-0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-8j80-1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-8j80-2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-9j80-0b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-9j80-1b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-9j80-2b. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-8j50-0b-MJ340. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-8j50-0b-MJ500. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-9j50-0b-MJ340. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-9j50-0b-MJ500. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-10j50-0b-MJ340. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} / \sqrt{H_{\mathrm{T}}}$ distribution in signal region SR-10j50-0b-MJ500. Two benchmark signal models are overlaid on the plot for comparison. Labelled `pMSSM' and `2-step', they show signal distributions from the example SUSY models (as described in the paper): a pMSSM slice model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV and a cascade decay model with ($m \tilde{g}$, $m \tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$) = (1300, 200) GeV.

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions (prior to the leptonic background fit) for the flavour stream with no b-jet requirement and a minimum transverse momentum of 50 GeV. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions (prior to the leptonic background fit) for the flavour stream with one inclusive b-jet required and a minimum transverse momentum of 50 GeV. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions (prior to the leptonic background fit) for the flavour stream with two inclusive b-jets required and a minimum transverse momentum of 50 GeV. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions (prior to the leptonic background fit) for the flavour stream with no b-jet requirement and a minimum transverse momentum of 80 GeV. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions (prior to the leptonic background fit) for the flavour stream with one inclusive b-jet required and a minimum transverse momentum of 80 GeV. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions (prior to the leptonic background fit) for the flavour stream with two inclusive b-jets required and a minimum transverse momentum of 80 GeV. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions (prior to the leptonic background fit) for the fat-jet stream with MJSigma above 340 GeV. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

Degree of multijet closure for signal and vaidation regions (prior to the leptonic background fit) for the fat-jet stream with MJSigma above 500 GeV. The solid lines are the pre-fit predicted numbers of events and the points are the observed numbers. The blue hatched band shows only the statistical (MC and data) uncertainty on the background estimate. The template closure uncertainty for each SR bin is given by the maximal deviation of data from prediction in any non-SR bin to its left on this plot (although those for 80 GeV regions are independent of deviations in 50 GeV regions).

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the 2Step grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the 2Step grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the 2Step grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the pMSSM grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the pMSSM grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the pMSSM grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the RPV grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the RPV grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the RPV grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the gtt off-shell grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the gtt off-shell grid.

The best-expected signal region and the corresponding best-observed and best-expected CLs values for the gtt off-shell grid.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section (in fb) for 2Step signal points for the best-expected signal region.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section (in fb) for RPV signal points for the best-expected signal region.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section (in fb) for gtt off-shell signal points for the best-expected signal region.

Performance of the SR-8j50-0b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-8j50-0b-MJ340 for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-8j50-0b-MJ500 for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-8j50-1b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-8j50-2b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-9j50-0b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-9j50-0b-MJ340 for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-9j50-0b-MJ500 for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-9j50-1b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-9j50-2b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-10j50-0b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-10j50-0b-MJ340 for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-10j50-0b-MJ500 for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-10j50-1b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-10j50-2b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-11j50-0b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-11j50-1b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-11j50-2b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-7j80-0b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-7j80-1b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-7j80-2b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-8j80-0b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-8j80-1b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-8j80-2b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-9j80-0b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-9j80-1b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Performance of the SR-9j80-2b for the 2Step grid: fractional acceptance; fractional efficiency.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in cos(theta*) (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in number of jets (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in transverse momentum of the leading jet (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in dijet invariant mass (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in dijet angle phi (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in m12 vs m34 (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in Higgs transverse momentum for 0 jet events (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in Higgs transverse momentum for 1-jet events (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in Higgs transverse momentum for events with 2 or more jets (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in dijet angle eta (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in invariant mass of the leading lepton pair (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured differential fiducial cross sections in number of bjets (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). Values without uncertainties are 95% CL limits in the absence of signal events. The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty. All predictions were normalized to the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication.

Measured fiducial cross sections (second column). The given uncertainty is split into statistical (first) and systematic components (second). The third column gives the theoretical prediction of Higgs production in the fiducial volume using the best available inclusive Higgs production cross sections at the time of the publication. The acceptance to estimate the cross section in the fiducial volume is calculated using Powheg NNLOPS for the ggF process, Powheg for the VBF and the VH processes, and Madgraph5_aMC@NLO for the ttH and bbH processes. The uncertainty includes PDF, scale, and branching fraction uncertainty.