Post-fit SR yields of the high-mass channel. The upper panel shows the observed number of events, as well the post-fit background predictions in each region. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data and the total background prediction. The shaded areas correspond to the total statistical and systematic uncertainties obtained after the fit and described in Section 6.

Post-fit SR yields of the high-mass channel. The upper panel shows the observed number of events, as well the post-fit background predictions in each region. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data and the total background prediction. The shaded areas correspond to the total statistical and systematic uncertainties obtained after the fit and described in Section 6.

Post-fit SR yields of the high-mass channel. The upper panel shows the observed number of events, as well the post-fit background predictions in each region. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data and the total background prediction. The shaded areas correspond to the total statistical and systematic uncertainties obtained after the fit and described in Section 6.

Post-fit SR yields of the high-mass channel. The upper panel shows the observed number of events, as well the post-fit background predictions in each region. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data and the total background prediction. The shaded areas correspond to the total statistical and systematic uncertainties obtained after the fit and described in Section 6.

Post-fit SR yields of the high-mass channel. The upper panel shows the observed number of events, as well the post-fit background predictions in each region. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data and the total background prediction. The shaded areas correspond to the total statistical and systematic uncertainties obtained after the fit and described in Section 6.

Post-fit SR yields of the high-mass channel. The upper panel shows the observed number of events, as well the post-fit background predictions in each region. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data and the total background prediction. The shaded areas correspond to the total statistical and systematic uncertainties obtained after the fit and described in Section 6.

Post-fit SR yields of the high-mass channel. The upper panel shows the observed number of events, as well the post-fit background predictions in each region. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data and the total background prediction. The shaded areas correspond to the total statistical and systematic uncertainties obtained after the fit and described in Section 6.

Pre-fit data and background (reweighted $2b$) predictions for each $4b$ SR $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ and $m_\text{eff}$ bin of the low-mass channel for the 2016 data-taking period. The bottom panel shows the significance of any differences between the observed $4b$ data and the background prediction. The $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands are shown in green and yellow, respectively. All systematics are included except the background normalization, which is 2.3%.

Pre-fit data and background (reweighted $2b$) predictions for each $4b$ SR $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ and $m_\text{eff}$ bin of the low-mass channel for the 2017 data-taking period. The bottom panel shows the significance of any differences between the observed $4b$ data and the background prediction. The $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands are shown in green and yellow, respectively. All systematics are included except the background normalization, which is 3.7%.

Pre-fit data and background (reweighted $2b$) predictions for each $4b$ SR $E_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ and $m_\text{eff}$ bin of the low-mass channel for the 2018 data-taking period. The bottom panel shows the significance of any differences between the observed $4b$ data and the background prediction. The $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands are shown in green and yellow, respectively. All systematics are included except the background normalization, which is 1.8%.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. Results from a previous ATLAS search using 24.3-36.1 fb$^{-1}$ [13] are shown by the solid (observed) and dashed (expected) blue lines. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the 95% CL observed (solid) and expected (dashed) upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})$, assuming the theory cross section for higgsino pair production. The higgsinos are assumed to decay as $\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G}$ or $\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z + \tilde{G}$. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the 95% CL observed (solid) and expected (dashed) upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})$, assuming the theory cross section for higgsino pair production. The higgsinos are assumed to decay as $\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G}$ or $\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z + \tilde{G}$. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the 95% CL observed (solid) and expected (dashed) upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})$, assuming the theory cross section for higgsino pair production. The higgsinos are assumed to decay as $\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G}$ or $\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z + \tilde{G}$. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the 95% CL observed (solid) and expected (dashed) upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})$, assuming the theory cross section for higgsino pair production. The higgsinos are assumed to decay as $\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G}$ or $\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z + \tilde{G}$. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass and high-mass channels. The low-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}<250$ GeV while the high-mass channel is used for $m_{\tilde{H}}\ge250$ GeV. The plot shows the 95% CL observed (solid) and expected (dashed) upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})$, assuming the theory cross section for higgsino pair production. The higgsinos are assumed to decay as $\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G}$ or $\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z + \tilde{G}$. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass channel. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the low-mass channel. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the high-mass channel. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Exclusion limits of the high-mass channel. The plot shows the observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the cross section of higgsino pair production, assuming a higgsino decay branching ratio of $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h + \tilde{G})=100\%$. The theory cross section and its uncertainty are shown by the solid red line and red shading. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the limits to the theory cross section. The phase space above the lines is excluded.

Results of the background-only fit in the low-mass channel discovery region SR_LM_150. Both pre-fit and post-fit values are shown.

Results of the background-only fit in the low-mass channel discovery region SR_LM_300. Both pre-fit and post-fit values are shown.

The experimental efficiency of the low-mass channel for the exclusion and discovery signal regions as a function of higgsino mass. The experimental efficiency is defined as the number of events passing the detector-level event selections divided by the number of events passing the event selections for a perfect detector. The denominator is obtained by implementing particle-level event selections that emulate the detector-level selections. This treats the lack of availability of $b$-jet triggers as an inefficiency.

The particle-level acceptance for the low-mass exclusion and discovery signal regions, shown as a function of higgsino mass. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events passing the particle-level event selection that emulates the detector-level selection. The acceptance calculation considers only those signal events where both higgsinos decay to Higgs bosons.

The experimental efficiency of the high-mass channel discovery regions as a function of higgsino mass. For each higgsino mass, the efficiency is shown for the SR-1 region corresponding to the mass. For masses above 1100 GeV, SR-1-1100 is used. The experimental efficiency is defined as the number of events passing the detector-level event selections divided by the number of events passing the event selections for a perfect detector. The denominator is obtained by implementing particle-level event selections that emulate the detector-level selections. The efficiency calculation considers only those signal events where both higgsinos decay to Higgs bosons.

The particle-level acceptance for the high-mass signal regions, shown as a function of higgsino mass. For each higgsino mass, the acceptance is shown for the SR-1 region corresponding to the mass. For masses above 1100 GeV, SR-1-1100 is used. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events passing the particle-level event selection that emulates the detector-level selection. The acceptance calculation considers only those signal events where both higgsinos decay to Higgs bosons.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 130 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 150 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 200 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 250 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 300 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 400 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 500 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 600 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 700 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 800 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 900 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 1000 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the low-mass channel for a representative 1100 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. The $b$-jet cut requires 4 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>40$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, with the availability of $b$-jet triggers lowering the luminosity to 126 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 200 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 250 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 300 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 400 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 500 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 600 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 700 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 800 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 900 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 1000 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 1100 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 1200 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 1300 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 1400 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Cutflow for the high-mass channel for a representative 1500 GeV signal. The preselection requires 4 or more jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV and 2 or more $b$-jets with $p_\text{T}>25$ GeV. As the samples are generated with $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$=50%, $\mathcal{B}(\tilde{H}\rightarrow Z\tilde{G})$=50% to allow for both decays to be studied, the $hh$ events selection is used to select the events where each of the higgsinos decays to a Higgs boson. Expected yields are normalized to a luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. All selections are cumulative, with the exception of the SR cuts, which are each applied separately.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.

Expected and observed CLs values per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed CLs values per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed CLs values per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed CLs values per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed cross-section upper-limit per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed cross-section upper-limit per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed cross-section upper-limit per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Expected and observed cross-section upper-limit per signal point represented by the grey numbers. The expected (dashed) and observed (solid) 95% CL exclusion limits are overlaid along with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Truth-level signal acceptances for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$) in a SR with the $S(d_0)$ requirement removed. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of accepted events divided by the total number of events in the generator-level signal Monte Carlo simulation, where the signal candidate track is identified as the charged particle with the largest distance between the interaction vertex and the secondary vertex of the higgsino decays.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-Low for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Signal efficiencies in SR-High for each production process ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$), defined by the number of events of reconstructed-level signal simulation divided by the number of events obtained at generator level, where the $S(d_0)$ selecton efficiency has the largest impact. The higgsino decay products from $\Delta \mathrm{m}(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0) < 0.4$ GeV signal have $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ too low to be reconstructed as the signal candidate tracks, and therefore the identified signal candidate tracks are typically from pile-up collisions or underlying events similar to the QCD track background, causing a low $S(d_0)$ selection efficiency in these plots.

Event selection cutflows for signal samples with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 150 GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^\pm, \tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 1.5, 1.0, and 0.75 GeV, including all six production processes ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$). The cross-section used to obtain the initial number of events ($\sigma(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{jets}}) \geq 1$) refers to an emission of at least one gluon or quark with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 50$ GeV at the parton level.

Event selection cutflows for signal samples with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 150 GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^\pm, \tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 1.5, 1.0, and 0.75 GeV, including all six production processes ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$). The cross-section used to obtain the initial number of events ($\sigma(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{jets}}) \geq 1$) refers to an emission of at least one gluon or quark with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 50$ GeV at the parton level.

Event selection cutflows for signal samples with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 150 GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^\pm, \tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 0.5, 0.35, and 0.25 GeV, including all six production processes ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$). The cross-section used to obtain the initial number of events ($\sigma(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{jets}}) \geq 1$) refers to an emission of at least one gluon or quark with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 50$ GeV at the parton level.

Event selection cutflows for signal samples with $m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 150 GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^\pm, \tilde{\chi}_{1}^0)$ = 0.5, 0.35, and 0.25 GeV, including all six production processes ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_1^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0$, $\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^-$, and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0 \tilde{\chi}_1^0$). The cross-section used to obtain the initial number of events ($\sigma(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{jets}}) \geq 1$) refers to an emission of at least one gluon or quark with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 50$ GeV at the parton level.

$p_{T}^{t}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|y^{t}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3 and 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3 and 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3 and 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9 and 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9 and 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9 and 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level, for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Fiducial phase-space cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t,1}$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level.

$|y^{t,1}|$ absolute differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|y^{t}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|y^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3 and 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3 and 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3 and 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9 and 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9 and 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9 and 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level, for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level.

$|{y}^{t,1}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level.

$p_{T}^{t}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|y^{t}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$p_{T}^{t,1}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|{y}^{t,1}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$p_{T}^{t,2}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|{y}^{t,2}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$m^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at particle level.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ absolute normalized cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at particle level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

$p_{T}^{t,1}$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level.

$|y^{t,1}|$ covariance matrix for the absolute differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|y^{t}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t,1}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|y^{t,1}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t,2}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|{y}^{t,2}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$m^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

${\chi}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|y_{B}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|p_{out}^{t\bar{t}}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|\Delta \phi(t_{1}, t_{2})|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

$|\cos\theta^{*}|$ covariance matrix for the normalized differential cross-section at parton level.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.6 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.6 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes |{y}^{t,2}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t,2}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,2}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,2}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.55 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.55 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.625 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.625 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 0.75 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t,1}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.75 TeV < $p_{T}^{t,1}$ < 2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}| $normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes |{y}^{t,1}|$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t,1}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t,1}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.1 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.2 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 0.35 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV and the $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.35 TeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.2 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.5 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2 and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 1 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.3, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.3 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.9, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 0.9 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.2 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.2 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1.5 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Covariance matrix between the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV and the $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|\otimes m^{t\bar{t}}\otimes p_{T}^{t,1}$ normalized differential cross-section at parton level for 0.9 < $|{y}^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2, 1.5 TeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 4 TeV.

Transverse profile for 70 GeV < pT < 100 GeV.

Longitudinal profile for pT > 100 GeV.

Transverse profile for pT > 100 GeV.

Average longitudinal profile

Transverse profile for pT > 100 GeV.

Upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow aa\rightarrow bb\mu\mu)$ at 95% CL including the BDT cut as a function of the signal mass.

Upper limits on $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow aa\rightarrow bb\mu\mu)$ at 95% CL without the BDT cut as a function of the signal mass.

Post-fit $m_\text{T}(\gamma, E_\text{T}^\text{miss})$ distribution in the inclusive signal region for the dark-photon search with the 125 GeV mass $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d})$ signal normalization set to zero. A $H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}$ decay signal is shown for two different mass hypotheses, 125 GeV and 500 GeV, and scaled to a $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d})$ of 2% and 1%, respectively. Events with $m_\text{T}(\gamma, E_\text{T}^\text{miss})$ larger than the rightmost bin boundary are added to that bin.

The 95% CL upper limit on the Higgs boson production cross-section times branching ratio to $\gamma \gamma_\text{d}$ is shown for different VBF-produced scalar-mediator-mass hypotheses in the NWA. The theoretically predicted cross-section of a Higgs boson produced via VBF and with the $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}) =$ 5% is superimposed on the $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ NNLO QCD + NLO EW uncertainty band of the expected production cross-section limit.

Post-fit $m_\text{jj}$ distribution in the inclusive signal region. The Higgs boson invisible decay signal is scaled to a $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ of 37%. Events with $m_\text{jj}$ larger than the rightmost bin boundary are added to that bin.

Post-fit $m_\text{jj}$ distribution in the one-lepton control region $W_{\ell \nu}^\gamma$ CR. Events with $m_\text{jj}$ larger than the rightmost bin boundary are added to that bin.

Post-fit $m_\text{T}$ distribution in the one lepton control region. Events with $m_\text{T}$ larger than the rightmost bin boundary are added to that bin.

Post-fit photon centrality distribution in the zero lepton signal plus control region with the $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ signal normalization set to zero in the fit.

Post-fit photon $E_\text{T}$ distribution in the zero lepton signal region with the $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ signal normalization set to zero in the fit.

Post-fit photon centrality distribution in the zero lepton signal plus control region resulting from the fit to the $m_\text{jj}$ distribution for EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theory contributions.

Post-fit photon $E_\text{T}$ distribution in the zero lepton signal region resulting from the fit to the $m_\text{jj}$ distribution for EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theory contributions.

Post-fit DNN output score distribution in the one lepton control region.

Yields for the EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$ process are shown after each selection along with relative and absolute signal acceptance efficiencies.

Yields for the 125 GeV Higgs boson with $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv.} =$ 1 signal produced by the vector boson fusion process in association with a final state photon are shown after each selection along with relative and absolute signal acceptance efficiencies.

Yields for the 125 GeV Higgs boson with $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}) =$ 1 signal produced by the vector boson fusion process are shown after each selection along with relative and absolute signal acceptance efficiencies.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$ and SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$ and SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$ and SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR0$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR1$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

The $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution in SR2$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for events passing the signal region requirements except the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ requirement. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band. The red arrows indicate the $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ selections in the signal regions.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino GGM models. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ bserved 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on wino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on slepton/sneutrino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$, where $k \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$+1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

$-1\sigma$ observed 95% CL exclusion limits on gluino NLSP pair production with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$, where $i \in{1,2}$. The limits are set using the statistical combination of disjoint signal regions. Where two (or more) signal regions overlap, the signal region contributing its observed $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value to the combination is the one with the better (best) expected $\mathrm{CL}_{\mathrm{s}}$ value.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the wino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the wino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the slepton/sneutrino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the slepton/sneutrino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the gluino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the gluino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Observed upper limit on the signal cross section in fb for the higgsino GGM models. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Best expected SR for the wino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the wino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the slepton/sneutrino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the slepton/sneutrino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the gluino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{12k}$ where $k \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the gluino NLSP models with RPV LSP decays via $\lambda_{i33}$ where $i \in{1,2}$. A value of 1 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 2 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 3 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 4 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and 5 corresponds to SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$.

Best expected SR for the higgsino GGM models. A value of 6 corresponds to SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$, 7 corresponds to SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$, 8 corresponds to SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}_{\mathrm{bveto}}$, and 9 corresponds to SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}_{\mathrm{bveto}}$.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ models for SR0$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR1$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the wino NLSP $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ models for SR2$_{\mathrm{breq}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Acceptance across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

Efficiency across the GGM Higgsino grid for SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$. The interpolation between signal scenarios studied is included for illustration purposes only and may be subject to interpolation effects in sparsely populated areas.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR5L. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light leptons in distribution in SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the taus leptons in distribution in SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the light taus in distribution in SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with four light leptons and a Z veto. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with four light leptons and one Z candidate. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with four light leptons and two Z candidates. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with exactly five light leptons. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with three light leptons and one tau and a Z veto. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with three light leptons and one tau and one Z candidate. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with two light leptons and two taus and a Z veto. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

The lepton flavour and multiplicities in events with two light leptons and two taus and one Z candidate. Distributions for data, the estimated SM backgrounds after the background-only fit, and an example SUSY scenario are shown. "Other" is the sum of the $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}WW$, $t\bar{t} ZZ$, $t\bar{t} WH$, $t\bar{t} HH$, $t\bar{t} tW$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ backgrounds. The last bin captures the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the expected SM background yield in each bin. Both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background are included in the shaded band.

Cutflow event yields in regions SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR0$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, SR0$_{\mathrm{breq}}$, and SR5L for RPV models with the $\lambda_{12k}\neq 0$ coupling. All yields correspond to weighted events, so that effects from lepton reconstruction efficiencies, trigger corrections, pileup reweighting, etc., are included. They are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the data sample, $\int L dt = 139\,\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$. The preliminary event reduction is a centralized stage where at least two electrons/muons with uncalibrated $p_{\mathrm{T}} >$ 9 GeV are required.

Cutflow event yields in regions SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR1$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and SR1$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for RPV models with the $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ coupling. All yields correspond to weighted events, so that effects from lepton reconstruction efficiencies, trigger corrections, pileup reweighting, etc., are included. They are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the data sample, $\int L dt = 139\,\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$. The preliminary event reduction is a centralized stage where at least two electrons/muons with uncalibrated $p_{\mathrm{T}} >$ 9 GeV are required.

Cutflow event yields in regions SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR2$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and SR2$_{\mathrm{breq}}$ for RPV models with the $\lambda_{i33}\neq 0$ coupling. All yields correspond to weighted events, so that effects from lepton reconstruction efficiencies, trigger corrections, pileup reweighting, etc., are included. They are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the data sample, $\int L dt = 139\,\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$. The preliminary event reduction is a centralized stage where at least two electrons/muons with uncalibrated $p_{\mathrm{T}} >$ 9 GeV are required.

Cutflow event yields in regions SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR0-ZZ$^{\mathrm{tight}}$, SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{loose}}$, SR0-ZZ$_{\mathrm{bveto}}^{\mathrm{tight}}$, and SR5L the higgsino GGM RPC model with BR($\tilde{\chi}^{0}_1 \rightarrow Z \tilde{G}$) = 50% and higgsino masses of 200 GeV, or BR($\tilde{\chi}^{0}_1 \rightarrow Z \tilde{G}$) = 100% and higgsino masses of 300 GeV. All yields correspond to weighted events, so that effects from lepton reconstruction efficiencies, trigger corrections, pileup reweighting, etc., are included. They are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the data sample, $\int L dt = 139\,\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$. The generator filter is a selection of $\geq$4e/$\mu$/$\tau_{\mathrm{had-vis}}$ leptons with $p_{\mathrm{T}}(e,\mu)>4$GeV, $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\tau_{\mathrm{had-vis}})>15$GeV and $|\eta|<2.8$ and is applied during the MC generation of the simulated events. The preliminary event reduction is a centralized stage where at least two electrons/muons with uncalibrated $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 9$ GeV are required.

Distribution of the missing transverse energy in CRTop. The Z+HF and $t\bar{t}$ scale factors, described in the text, have been applied to the simulated samples. The distribution labeled "Signal" is for the model with ($m_a$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$) = (45 GeV, 10 GeV, 80 GeV).

Distribution of the dijet invariant mass in the signal region, shown together with the parameterized background model (labelled "Bkg Model"). For reference, the MC prediction for the SM background is also shown (labelled "SM MC"). The Z+HF and $t\bar{t}$ scale factors, described in the text, have been applied to the simulated samples. The signal region is defined to have dijet invariant mass > 20 GeV. The distribution labeled "Signal" is for the model with ($m_a$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}$) = (45 GeV, 10 GeV, 80 GeV).

Upper limits at 95% CL on the $pp \rightarrow ZH$ cross section times the branching ratio for $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ (where $\ell = e, \mu \;\mathrm{or}\; \tau$) and $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 10$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 65$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain after the decay $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ are set to 100%.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the $pp \rightarrow ZH$ cross section times the branching ratio for $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ (where $\ell = e, \mu \;\mathrm{or}\; \tau$) and $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 10$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 80$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain after the decay $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ are set to 100%.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the $pp \rightarrow ZH$ cross section times the branching ratio for $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ (where $\ell = e, \mu\; \mathrm{or}\; \tau$) and $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 10$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 95$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain after the decay $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ are set to 100%.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the $pp \rightarrow ZH$ cross section times the branching ratio for $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ (where $\ell = e, \mu\; \mathrm{or}\; \tau$) and $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 10$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 110$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain after the decay $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ are set to 100%.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the $pp \rightarrow ZH$ cross section times the branching ratio for $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ (where $\ell = e, \mu\; \mathrm{or}\; \tau$) and $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 20$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 80$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain after the decay $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ are set to 100%.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the $pp \rightarrow ZH$ cross section times the branching ratio for $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ (where $\ell = e, \mu \;\mathrm{or}\; \tau$) and $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 30$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 80$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain after the decay $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ are set to 100%.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the branching ratio $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 10$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 65$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. The SM $ZH$ cross section is assumed.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the branching ratio $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 10$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 80$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. The SM $ZH$ cross section is assumed.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the branching ratio $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 10$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 95$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. The SM $ZH$ cross section is assumed.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the branching ratio $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 10$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 110$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. The SM $ZH$ cross section is assumed.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the branching ratio $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 20$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 80$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. The SM $ZH$ cross section is assumed.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the branching ratio $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ as a function of $m_{a}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}} = 30$ GeV and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}} = 80$ GeV in the NMSSM scenario described in the text. The SM $ZH$ cross section is assumed.

Unweighted and weighted number of events after each stage of selection for the NMSSM scenario with $pp \rightarrow ZH$, $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$, $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ where $(m_{a}, m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}}) = (45,10,80)$ GeV and the Z boson decaying to $e^{+}e^{-}, \;\mu^{+}\mu^{-} \;\mathrm{or}\; \tau^{+}\tau^{-}$. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain are set to 100%. The weighted number of events corresponds to an integrated luminosity of $139 \;\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$. The "skimming selection" required either a single electron or muon with $p_{T} > 100\;$ GeV or a pair of electrons or muons each with $p_{T} > 20\;$ GeV. The preselection requirements include the trigger, absence of a bad jet or bad muon, and two leptons, where a lepton is either an electron or a muon.

Acceptance and efficiency of this analysis for the signal models considered in this paper. The signal is an NMSSM scenario with $pp \rightarrow ZH$, $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$, $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ where the values of $(m_{a}, m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}})$ are varied. The Z boson decays to $e^{+}e^{-}, \mu^{+}\mu^{-} \;\mathrm{or}\; \tau^{+}\tau^{-}$. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain are set to 100%. The product of acceptance times efficiency is defined by the fraction of simulated events that pass all the selection criteria of this analysis. The acceptance is defined by the fraction of simulated events that pass all the selection criteria as applied to Monte Carlo truth-level quantities. The efficiency is then defined as the acceptance times efficiency, divided by the acceptance.

Acceptance and efficiency of this analysis for the signal models considered in this paper. The signal is an NMSSM scenario with $pp \rightarrow ZH$, $Z \rightarrow \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$, $H \rightarrow \tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow a \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} \rightarrow b\bar{b} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ where the values of $(m_{a}, m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}})$ are varied. The Z boson decays to $e^{+}e^{-}, \mu^{+}\mu^{-} \;\mathrm{or}\; \tau^{+}\tau^{-}$. All branching ratios in the Higgs boson decay chain are set to 100%. The product of acceptance times efficiency is defined by the fraction of simulated events that pass all the selection criteria of this analysis. The acceptance is defined by the fraction of simulated events that pass all the selection criteria as applied to Monte Carlo truth-level quantities. The efficiency is then defined as the acceptance times efficiency, divided by the acceptance.

95% CL exclusion limits on $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow aa \rightarrow b\bar{b}b\bar{b})$ for $m_a = 45$ GeV.

95% CL exclusion limits on $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow aa \rightarrow b\bar{b}b\bar{b})$ for $m_a = 55$ GeV.

The fraction of $a$ boson decays matched to reconstructed displaced vertices passing all vertex selections in signal MC.

The extrapolated signal selection efficiency as a function of $c\tau_{a}$.

Expected +- 2 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model ggF production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model ggF production.

Expected +- 1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model ggF production.

Expected +- 2 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model ggF production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model bbA production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model bbA production.

Expected +- 1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model bbA production.

Expected +- 2 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model bbA production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model with the benchmark used in arXiv:1707.01302.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model with the benchmark used in arXiv:1707.01302.

Expected +- 1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model with the benchmark used in arXiv:1707.01302.

Expected +- 2 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model with the benchmark used in arXiv:1707.01302.

Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on cross-section for Zprime-2HDM model.

Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on cross-section for ggF producton in the 2HDM+a model.

Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on cross-section for bbA producton in the 2HDM+a model.

Model-independent upper limits on the visible cross-section $σ_{vis, $h(\bar{b})+DM} ≡ σ_{h+DM} \times B(h \to b\bar{b}) \times \mathcal{A} \times \epsilon$ in the different signal regions.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 3b region with MET > 500 GeV.

Yields in 1-lepton control region.

Yields in 2-lepton control region.

MET distribution in 2b region of the 0-lepton channel.

MET distribution in 3b region of the 0-lepton channel.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 3b region with MET > 500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET>500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET > 500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.

Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 3b region with MET > 500 GeV.