Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $p_T$ of the second-highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $|\eta|$ of the highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $|\eta|$ of the second-highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the pseudorapidity difference between the two highest-$p_T$ jets in the event

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the two highest-$p_T$ jets in the event

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 0 jet, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 1 jet, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 2 jets, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with at least 3 jets, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 0 jet, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 1 jet, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 2 jets, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with at least 3 jets, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Inclusive cross section predictions up to QCD NNLO accuracy using the NNPDF3.1 PDF set

Measured production cross sections ratio $\sigma(W^+ + \overline{c})$ / $\sigma(W^- + c)$

Predictions for the cross sections ratio $\sigma(W^+ + \overline{c})$ / $\sigma(W^- + c)$ at QCD NLO accuracy from MCFM using different PDF sets

Predictions for the cross sections ratio $\sigma(W^+ + \overline{c})$ / $\sigma(W^- + c)$ up to QCD NNLO accuracy using the NNPDF3.1 PDF set

Measured diferential cross sections $\sigma(W^- + c) + \sigma(W^+ + \overline{c})$ as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the lepton from the W decay, unfolded to the particle level.

Measured diferential cross sections as a function of the transverse momentum of the lepton from the W decay, unfolded to the particle level.

Measured diferential cross sections $\sigma(W^- + c) + \sigma(W^+ + \overline{c})$ as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the lepton from the W decay, unfolded to the parton level.

Measured diferential cross sections as a function of the transverse momentum of the lepton from the W decay, unfolded to the parton level.

Measured diferential cross sections ratio $R=\sigma(W^+ + \overline{c}) / \sigma(W^- + c)$ as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the lepton from the W decay.

Measured diferential cross sections ratio $R=\sigma(W^+ + \overline{c}) / \sigma(W^- + c)$ as a function of the transverse momentum of the lepton from the W decay.

Relative uncertainties on the measured fractional differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured absolute differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured fractional differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ cross section.

Response matrix from the fiducial to the reconstructed bins of the differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ cross section measurement.

Measured absolute differential $\eta^{\gamma}$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Measured fractional differential $\eta^{\gamma}$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Relative uncertainties on the measured absolute differential $\eta^{\gamma}$ cross section.

Relative uncertainties on the measured fractional differential $\eta^{\gamma}$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured absolute differential $\eta^{\gamma}$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured fractional differential $\eta^{\gamma}$ cross section.

Response matrix from the fiducial to the reconstructed bins of the differential $\eta^{\gamma}$ cross section measurement.

Measured absolute differential $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Measured fractional differential $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Relative uncertainties on the measured absolute differential $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section.

Relative uncertainties on the measured fractional differential $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured absolute differential $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured fractional differential $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section.

Response matrix from the fiducial to the reconstructed bins of the differential $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section measurement.

Measured absolute differential $\Delta\eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Measured fractional differential $\Delta\eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Relative uncertainties on the measured absolute differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section.

Relative uncertainties on the measured fractional differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured absolute differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured fractional differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section.

Response matrix from the fiducial to the reconstructed bins of the differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section measurement.

Measured absolute differential $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Measured fractional differential $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Relative uncertainties on the measured absolute differential $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}$ cross section.

Relative uncertainties on the measured fractional differential $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured absolute differential $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}$ cross section.

Correlation matrix for the measured fractional differential $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}$ cross section.

Response matrix from the fiducial to the reconstructed bins of the differential $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}$ cross section measurement.

Measured absolute differential $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Correlation matrix for the measured absolute differential $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ cross section. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$.

Response matrix from the fiducial to the reconstructed bins of the differential $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ cross section measurement.

Relative uncertainties on the measured absolute differential $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ cross section.

Measured absolute differential $\Delta\eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$. Requirements of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}>150\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and a veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ are applied in addition to the baseline selection.

Measured fractional differential $\Delta\eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8, GENEVA, MATRIX and MCFM predictions. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$. Requirements of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}>150\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and a veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ are applied in addition to the baseline selection.

Relative uncertainties on the measured absolute differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section. Requirements of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}>150\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and a veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ are applied in addition to the baseline selection.

Relative uncertainties on the measured fractional differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section. Requirements of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}>150\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and a veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ are applied in addition to the baseline selection.

Correlation matrix for the measured absolute differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section. Requirements of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}>150\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and a veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ are applied in addition to the baseline selection.

Correlation matrix for the measured fractional differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section. Requirements of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}>150\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and a veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ are applied in addition to the baseline selection.

Response matrix from the fiducial to the reconstructed bins of the differential $\Delta \eta(\ell,\gamma)$ cross section measurement. Requirements of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cluster}}>150\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and a veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ are applied in addition to the baseline selection.

Fiducial cross section scaling terms as a function of $C_{3W}$ in all $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} \times |\phi_{f}|$ bins. Values are given relative to the SM prediction.

Scans of the profile likelihood test statistic $q$ as a function of $C_{3W}$, given with and without the pure BSM term.

Scans of the profile likelihood test statistic $q$ as a function of $C_{3W}$, given with and without the pure BSM term.

Best-fit values of $C_{3W}$ and corresponding 95% CL confidence intervals as a function of the maximum $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ bin included in the fit, with and without the pure BSM term.

Best-fit values of $C_{3W}$ and corresponding 95% CL confidence intervals as a function of the maximum $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ bin included in the fit, with and without the binning in $|\phi_{f}|$.

Response matrix from the fiducial to the reconstructed bins of the differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} \times |\phi_{f}|$ cross section measurement.

Measured double-differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} \times |\phi_{f}|$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8 NLO prediction. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 80\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 150\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$. A veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ is also applied for this result.

Measured double-differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} \times |\phi_{f}|$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8 NLO prediction. This table gives the entries for the $(0,\pi/6)$ slice. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 80\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 150\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$. A veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ is also applied for this result.

Measured double-differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} \times |\phi_{f}|$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8 NLO prediction. This table gives the entries for the $(\pi/6,\pi/3)$ slice. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 80\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 150\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$. A veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ is also applied for this result.

Measured double-differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} \times |\phi_{f}|$ cross section, compared to the MG5_aMC+PY8 NLO prediction. This table gives the entries for the $(\pi/3,\pi/2)$ slice. The differential cross sections $\sigma_{j}(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{W}^{\pm}\gamma\rightarrow\ell^{\pm}\nu\gamma)$, where $\ell$ denotes all three lepton flavors, are measured in the following fiducial region: $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell} > 80\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} > 150\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta^{\gamma}| < 2.5$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}} > 40\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) > 0.7$. The leptons are dressed by adding the four-momenta of any photons with $\Delta R(\ell, \gamma) < 0.1$ to the four-momentum of the lepton. A smooth-cone photon isolation is also applied, with parameters $\delta_{0}=0.4$, $\epsilon=1.0$, and $n=1$. A veto on the presence of any jet with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $|\eta| < 2.5$ is also applied for this result.

Correlation matrix for the measured absolute differential $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma} \times |\phi_{f}|$ cross section.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the fourth-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the leading jet from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the sub-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the third-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the fourth-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different PYTHIA 8 (P8), HERWIG ++ (H++), and HERWIG 7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaS distribution from data to different PYTHIA 8 (P8), HERWIG ++ (H++), and HERWIG 7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the leading jet from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the sub-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the third-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the fourth-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the leading jet from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the sub-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the third-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the fourth-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to differentKATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin, distribution from data to differentKATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaY and distribution from data to differentKATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to differentKATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions havebeen normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaS distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions havebeen normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the leading jet from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the sub-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the third-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the fourth-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the leading jet from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the sub-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the third-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the fourth-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distributions from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions havebeen normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaS distributions from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

The DeltaS distribution obtained from the mixed data sample compared to predictions from the pure DPS sample in PYTHIA 8 (P8) and KATIE (KT). The distributions are normalized to unity.

The results of the template fit for the POWHEG (PW) NLO 2 -> 2 model without the hard MPI removed. As the DeltaS distribution obtained from the mixed data sample carries a statistical and systematic uncertainty, so does the total fitted sample.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different PYTHIA 8 (P8), HERWIG ++ (H++), and HERWIG 7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaS distribution from data to different PYTHIA 8 (P8), HERWIG ++ (H++), and HERWIG 7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the DeltaS distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the DeltaS distributions from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross sections as a function of the variable $z_{I\!\!P}$ for diffractive dijet DIS. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations and the radiative corrections ($1+\delta_{\text{rad}}$) are also listed. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross sections as a function of the variable $x_{I\!\!P}$ for diffractive dijet DIS. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations and the radiative corrections ($1+\delta_{\text{rad}}$) are also listed. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross sections as a function of the variable $y$ for diffractive dijet DIS. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations and the radiative corrections ($1+\delta_{\text{rad}}$) are also listed. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross sections as a function of the variable $Q^2$ for diffractive dijet DIS. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations and the radiative corrections ($1+\delta_{\text{rad}}$) are also listed. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross sections for diffractive dijet DIS as a function of the variable $E_T^{*\text{jet1}}$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations and the the radiative corrections ($1+\delta_{\text{rad}}$) are also listed. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross sections for diffractive dijet DIS as a function of the variable $M_X$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations and the the radiative corrections ($1+\delta_{\text{rad}}$) are also listed. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross sections for diffractive dijet DIS as a function of the variable $\vert\Delta\eta^{\text{jets}}\vert$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations and the the radiative corrections ($1+\delta_{\text{rad}}$) are also listed. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross sections for diffractive dijet DIS as a function of the variable $\langle\eta^{\text{jets}}\rangle$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations and the the radiative corrections ($1+\delta_{\text{rad}}$) are also listed. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections as a function of the variable $z_{I\!\!P}$ for the dijet photoproduction kinematic range. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections as a function of the variable $x_{I\!\!P}$ for the dijet photoproduction kinematic range. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections as a function of the variable $y$ for the dijet photoproduction kinematic range. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections as a function of the variable $x_\gamma$ for the dijet photoproduction kinematic range. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections in the photoproduction kinematic range as a function of the variable $E_T^{*\text{jet1}}$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections in the photoproduction kinematic range as a function of the variable $M_X$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections in the photoproduction kinematic range as a function of the variable $\vert\Delta\eta^{\text{jets}}\vert$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Bin averaged hadron level differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections in the photoproduction kinematic range as a function of the variable $\langle\eta^{\text{jets}}\rangle$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given. The overall normalisation uncertainty of $6\%$ is not included in the table.

Ratios of differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections, measured in photoproduction, to measurements in DIS as a function of the variable $\vert\Delta\eta^{\text{jets}}\vert$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given.

Ratios of differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections, measured in photoproduction, to measurements in DIS as a function of the variable $y$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given.

Ratios of differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections, measured in photoproduction, to measurements in DIS as a function of the variable $z_{I\!\!P}$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given.

Ratios of differential diffractive dijet $ep$ cross sections, measured in photoproduction, to measurements in DIS as a function of the variable $E_T^{*\text{jet1}}$. The hadronisation correction factors ($1+\delta_{\text{hadr}}$) applied to the NLO calculations are given.

Diffractive DIS dijet cross section measured differentially as a function of $\log x_P$. The global normalisation uncertainty of $7.8\%$ is not listed explicitly but is included in the total systematic uncertainty. The last two column show the correction factors for hadronisation and QED radiation, respectively. (Note: assume typo in Table 2 that $x_P$ really means $\log x_P$.).

Diffractive DIS dijet cross section measured differentially as a function of $z_P$. The global normalisation uncertainty of $7.8\%$ is not listed explicitly but is included in the total systematic uncertainty. The last two column show the correction factors for hadronisation and QED radiation, respectively.

Diffractive DIS dijet cross section measured differentially as a function of $p^{\ast}_{T,1}$.

Diffractive DIS dijet cross section measured differentially as a function of $p^{\ast}_{T,2}$.

Diffractive DIS dijet cross section measured differentially as a function of $\langle p^{\ast}_{T}\rangle$.

Diffractive DIS dijet cross section measured differentially as a function of $\Delta\eta^{\ast}$.

Diffractive DIS dijet cross section measured differentially as a function of $z_P$ and $Q^2$.

Diffractive DIS dijet cross section measured differentially as a function of $p^{\ast}_{\rm T,1}$ and $Q^2$.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of X(C=POMERON). The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of Z(C=POMERON). The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of the average pseudorapidity of the dijet system. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of the absolute difference of the pseudorapidities of the two jets. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of W. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of the dijet invariant mass. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged hadron level differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of mass of the diffractive system. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged hadron level double-differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of X(GAMMA) for 3 ranges of ET of jet 1. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged hadron level double-differential cross section for diffractive dijet production as a function of Z(POMERON) for 2 ranges of X(GAMMA). The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Ratios of the diffractive to the inclusive single-differential hadron level dijet cross sections as a function of X(C=GAMMA). The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Ratios of the diffractive to the inclusive single-differential hadron level dijet cross sections as a function of ET of jet 1. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Ratios of the diffractive to the inclusive single-differential hadron level dijet cross sections as a function of the average pseudorapidity of the dijet system. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Ratios of the diffractive to the inclusive single-differential hadron level dijet cross sections as a function of the absolute difference in the pseudorapidities of the 2 jets. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Ratios of the diffractive to the inclusive single-differential hadron level dijet cross sections as a function of the invariant mass of the dijet system. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Ratios of the diffractive to the inclusive single-differential hadron level dijet cross sections as a function of W. The first systematic error is the uncorrelated and the second the correlated uncertainty.

Bin averaged differential cross section as a function of ET in the defined phase space.

Bin averaged double differential cross section for inclusive prompt photon production in bins of ET and the pseudorapidity range -1.00 to -0.57.

Bin averaged double differential cross section for inclusive prompt photon production in bins of ET and the pseudorapidity range -0.57 to 0.20.

Bin averaged double differential cross section for inclusive prompt photon production in bins of ET and the pseudorapidity range 0.20 to 0.94.

Bin averaged double differential cross section for inclusive prompt photon production in bins of ET and the pseudorapidity range 0.94 to 1.42.

Bin averaged double differential cross section for inclusive prompt photon production in bins of ET and the pseudorapidity range 1.42 to 2.43.

Bin averaged differential cross section for prompt photon plus jet as a function of the photon transverse energy.

Bin averaged differential cross section for prompt photon plus jet as a function of the photon pseudorapidity.

Bin averaged differential cross section for prompt photon plus jet as a function of the jet transverse energy.

Bin averaged differential cross section for prompt photon plus jet as a function of the jet pseudorapidity.

Bin averaged differential cross section for prompt photon plus jet as a function of X(C=GAMMA,LO) thelongitudinal momentum fraction of the partons in the photon in LO approximation.

Bin averaged differential cross section for prompt photon plus jet as a function of X(C=P,LO) thelongitudinal momentum fraction of the partons in the proton in LO approximation.

Bin averaged differential cross section for prompt photon plus jet as a function of the photons transverse momentum perpendicular to the jet direction separated into two regions of X(C=GAMMA,LO).

Bin averaged differential cross section for prompt photon plus jet as a function of the difference in azimuthal angle between the photon and the jet separated into two regions of X(C=GAMMA,LO).

Single differential cross section DSIG/DZ for D*+- production. The DSYS errors are the uncorrelated and correlated systematicuncertainties respectively.

Single differential cross section DSIG/DLOG(Q**2) for D*+- production. The DSYS errors are the uncorrelated and correlated systematicuncertainties respectively.

Single differential cross section DSIG/DX for D*+- production. The DSYS errors are the uncorrelated and correlated systematicuncertainties respectively.

Double differential cross section for D*+- production in the LOG(Q**2) binfrom 2.0 to 2.2. The DSYS errors are the uncorrelated and correlated systematicuncertainties respectively.

Double differential cross section for D*+- production in the LOG(Q**2) binfrom 2.2 to 2.4. The DSYS errors are the uncorrelated and correlated systematicuncertainties respectively.

Double differential cross section for D*+- production in the LOG(Q**2) binfrom 2.4 to 3.0. The DSYS errors are the uncorrelated and correlated systematicuncertainties respectively.

Measured values of the charm contributions to F2 for a mean Q**2 of 120GeV. The third DSYS error is the model uncertainty.

Measured values of the charm contributions to F2 for a mean Q**2 of 200GeV. The third DSYS error is the model uncertainty.

Measured values of the charm contributions to F2 for a mean Q**2 of 400GeV. The third DSYS error is the model uncertainty.

Differential cross section as a function of the photon ETARAP.

Differential cross section as a function of Q**2.

Differential cross section as a function of the photon ET in the ETARAP bins -1.2 to -0.6.

Differential cross section as a function of the photon ET in the ETARAP bins -0.6 to 0.2.

Differential cross section as a function of the photon ET in the ETARAP bins 0.2 to 0.9.

Differential cross section as a function of the photon ET in the ETARAP bins 0.9 to 1.4.

Differential cross section as a function of the photon ET in the ETARAP bins 1.4 to 1.8.

Differential cross section as a function of the photon ET in the higher Q**2 range > 40 GeV**2.

Differential cross section as a function of the photon ETARAP in the higher Q**2 range > 40 GeV**2.

Differential cross section for isolated photon production accompanied by non or at least 1-jet as a function of the photon ET.

Differential cross section for isolated photon production accompanied by non or at least 1-jet as a function of the photon ETARAP.

Differential cross section for isolated photon production accompanied by non or at least 1-jet as a function of Q**2.