Measured diferential cross sections as a function of the transverse momentum 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 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.

Measured cross section from the helicity fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured charge asymmetry from the helicity fit for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured cross section from the helicity fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured cross section from the helicity fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured charge asymmetry from the helicity fit for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured cross section from the helicity fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured cross section from the helicity fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured charge asymmetry from the helicity fit for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured cross section from the helicity fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured cross section from the helicity fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{-}_{L}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on charge asymmetry versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W_{L}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}_{L}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{-}_{R}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}_{R}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}_{R}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}_{L}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{-}_{L}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{-}_{R}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on charge asymmetry versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W_{R}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on unpolarized charge asymmetry versus $|y_{W}|$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on $A_{4}$ coefficient versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}$

Impact of groups of uncertainties on $A_{4}$ coefficient versus $|y_{W}|$ for $W^{+}$

Correlation matrix among normalized signal cross sections in the helicity fit, for combination of muon and electron channel. The cross sections are shown in Fig. 9 in paper

Correlation matrix among normalized signal cross sections in the helicity fit, for combination of muon and electron channel. The cross sections are shown in Fig. 9 in paper

Correlation matrix among PDF nuisances parameters in the helicity fit with fixed signal cross sections, for combination of muon and electron channel. The postfit values for these nuisance parameters are shown in Fig. 20 in paper

Postfit pulls and constraints for some nuisance parameters: $p_T^{W}$ binned $\mu_R$, $\mu_F$, $\mu_R\mu_F$ for $W_R$

Postfit pulls and constraints for some nuisance parameters: $p_T^{W}$ binned $\mu_R$, $\mu_F$, $\mu_R\mu_F$ for $W_L$

Postfit pulls and constraints for some nuisance parameters: PDFs and $\alpha_S$

Postfit pulls and constraints for all nuisance parameters in the W boson helicity fit with fixed signal cross sections, from combination of electron and muon channel. The convention adopted to name nuisance parameters in the tables is reported in glossary_nuisAndPois.txt

Postfit pulls and constraints for all nuisance parameters in the W boson helicity fit with floating signal cross sections, from combination of electron and muon channel. The convention adopted to name nuisance parameters in the tables is reported in glossary_nuisAndPois.txt

Measured double differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by 2D-bin area, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured double differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by 2D-bin area, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured double differential charge asymmetry from the double-differential cross section fit, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured double differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by 2D-bin area, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured double differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by 2D-bin area, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured double differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by 2D-bin area, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured double differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by 2D-bin area, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential charge asymmetry from the double-differential cross section fit, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured fiducial cross sections and ratio from the double-differential cross section fit, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential charge asymmetry from the double-differential cross section fit, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Measured differential cross section from the double-differential cross section fit, divided by bin width, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on charge asymmetry versus lepton $|\eta|$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus lepton $|\eta|$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus lepton $|\eta|$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus lepton $|\eta|$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on charge asymmetry versus lepton $p_{T}$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus lepton $p_{T}$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus lepton $p_{T}$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus lepton $p_{T}$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on absolute differential cross section versus lepton $p_{T}$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Impact of groups of uncertainties on normalized differential cross section versus lepton $|\eta|$, for combination of muon and electron channel

Postfit pulls and constraints for all nuisance parameters in the W boson double-differential cross section fit with floating signal cross sections, from combination of electron and muon channel. The convention adopted to name nuisance parameters in the tables is reported in glossary_nuisAndPois.txt