95% CL upper limits as a function of (left) cτ_{π_d} and (right) M_φ. The upper plots show the expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) for m_{π_d} = 20 GeV: (a) using M_φ = 1.6 TeV and (b) using cτ_{π_d} = 20 mm. The lower plots show a comparison of the observed limits for all three dark pion masses: (c) using M_φ = 1.4 TeV, and (d) using cτ_{π_d} = 1 mm. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

95% CL upper limits as a function of (left) cτ_{π_d} and (right) M_φ. The upper plots show the expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) for m_{π_d} = 20 GeV: (a) using M_φ = 1.6 TeV and (b) using cτ_{π_d} = 20 mm. The lower plots show a comparison of the observed limits for all three dark pion masses: (c) using M_φ = 1.4 TeV, and (d) using cτ_{π_d} = 1 mm. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

95% CL exclusion contours as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}. The expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. A comparison of the observed limits is given in (d) for each of the three dark pion masses.

95% CL exclusion contours as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}. The expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. A comparison of the observed limits is given in (d) for each of the three dark pion masses.

95% CL exclusion contours as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}. The expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. A comparison of the observed limits is given in (d) for each of the three dark pion masses.

95% CL exclusion contours as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}. The expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. A comparison of the observed limits is given in (d) for each of the three dark pion masses.

Comparison of the 95% CL exclusion contours between ATLAS and CMS  for (a) models with m_{π_d} = 10 GeV and (b) models with m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. The expected and observed limits are shown for ATLAS, while only the observed limits in both the model agnostic and GNN cases are included for CMS. The expected limits from the CMS result are omitted, but are, in general, very close to the CMS observed limits.

Comparison of the 95% CL exclusion contours between ATLAS and CMS  for (a) models with m_{π_d} = 10 GeV and (b) models with m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. The expected and observed limits are shown for ATLAS, while only the observed limits in both the model agnostic and GNN cases are included for CMS. The expected limits from the CMS result are omitted, but are, in general, very close to the CMS observed limits.

Normalized minPTF distribution in data, with three selected signal samples for comparison

95% CL exclusion contours as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d} for the Cut-Based analysis. The expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. A comparison of the observed limits is given in (d) for each of the three dark pion masses.

95% CL exclusion contours as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d} for the Cut-Based analysis. The expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. A comparison of the observed limits is given in (d) for each of the three dark pion masses.

95% CL exclusion contours as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d} for the Cut-Based analysis. The expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. A comparison of the observed limits is given in (d) for each of the three dark pion masses.

95% CL exclusion contours as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d} for the Cut-Based analysis. The expected and observed limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV. A comparison of the observed limits is given in (d) for each of the three dark pion masses.

Comparison of observed and expected 95% CL limits of the Cut-Based analysis against the corresponding BDT-based analysis. Limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d} for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV.

Comparison of observed and expected 95% CL limits of the Cut-Based analysis against the corresponding BDT-based analysis. Limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d} for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV.

Comparison of observed and expected 95% CL limits of the Cut-Based analysis against the corresponding BDT-based analysis. Limits on σ(pp →φ^†φ) are shown as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d} for (a) m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, (b) m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, and (c) m_{π_d} = 20 GeV.

Normalized event-level BDT response distribution in data, with three selected signal samples for comparison.

Normalized jet-matched displaced vertex multiplicity (N_DV) distribution in data, with three selected signal samples for comparison.

Normalized event-level BDT response distribution in data, with three selected signal samples for comparison. All three signal models have M_φ = 1.8 TeV and cτ_{π_d} = 75 mm, but different m_{π_d}.

Normalized event-level BDT response distribution in data, with three selected signal samples for comparison. All three signal models have m_{π_d} = 10 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 20 mm, but different M_φ.

Normalized event-level BDT response distribution in data, with three selected signal samples for comparison. All three signal models have m_{π_d} = 10 GeV and M_φ = 1.4 TeV, but different cτ_{π_d}.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 1000 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 500 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 300 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 150 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 75 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 20 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 5 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limit for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 2 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and cτ_{π_d} = 1 mm as a function of dark mediator mass. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and M_φ = 2.2 TeV as a function of dark pion lifetime. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and M_φ = 2 TeV as a function of dark pion lifetime. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and M_φ = 1.8 TeV as a function of dark pion lifetime. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and M_φ = 1.6 TeV as a function of dark pion lifetime. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and M_φ = 1.4 TeV as a function of dark pion lifetime. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 5, 10, and 20 GeV and M_φ = 1 TeV as a function of dark pion lifetime. The mediator mass-dependent theoretical cross-section is given with the band corresponding to the uncertainty from NNLL-Fast.

Observed and expected 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 20 GeV as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}.

Observed and expected 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 20 GeV as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}.

Observed and expected 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 20 GeV as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}.

Observed and expected 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 20 GeV as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}.

Observed and expected 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 20 GeV as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}.

Observed and expected 95% CL limits for models with m_{π_d} = 20 GeV as a function of M_φ and cτ_{π_d}.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, M_φ = 1600 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, M_φ = 1400 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, M_φ = 1000 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, M_φ = 2200 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, M_φ = 2000 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, M_φ = 1800 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, M_φ = 1600 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, M_φ = 1400 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 5 GeV, M_φ = 1000 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 20 GeV, M_φ = 2200 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 20 GeV, M_φ = 2000 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 20 GeV, M_φ = 1800 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 20 GeV, M_φ = 1600 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 20 GeV, M_φ = 1400 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 20 GeV, M_φ = 1000 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, M_φ = 2200 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, M_φ = 2000 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Cut-Flow efficiencies for the m_{π_d} = 10 GeV, M_φ = 1800 GeV models for all cuts before entering the Search region (ABCD plane) and then for each of the ABCD regions separately.

Distributions of DNN score for the data and post-fit backgrounds (stacked histograms), in the SRs of the ZV channel for the b tag (left) and the b veto (right) channels, for the resolved (merged) category in the first (second) row. The post-fit VBS EW ZV signal is shown overlaid as a red solid line. The overflow is included in the last bin. The lower panels show the ratios of the data to the pre-fit background prediction and post-fit background yield as red open squares and blue points, respectively. The gray band in the lower panels indicates the systematic component of the post-fit background uncertainty. The vertical bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow.

Distributions of M(ZV) for the data and post-fit backgrounds (stacked histograms), in the SRs of the merged b tag (left) and the merged b veto (right) channels. The template for one signal hypothesis is shown overlaid as a red solid line. The overflow is included in the last bin. The lower panels show the ratios of the data to the pre-fit background prediction and post-fit background yield as red open squares and blue points, respectively. The gray band in the lower panels indicates the systematic component of the post-fit background uncertainty. The vertical bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow.

Distributions of M(ZV) for the data and post-fit backgrounds (stacked histograms), in the SRs of the merged b tag (left) and the merged b veto (right) channels. The template for one signal hypothesis is shown overlaid as a red solid line. The overflow is included in the last bin. The lower panels show the ratios of the data to the pre-fit background prediction and post-fit background yield as red open squares and blue points, respectively. The gray band in the lower panels indicates the systematic component of the post-fit background uncertainty. The vertical bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow.

Distributions of M(WV) for the data and post-fit backgrounds (stacked histograms), in the SRs of the electron (left) and muon (right) channels in the merged regime. The template for one signal hypothesis is shown overlaid as a red solid line. The overflow is included in the last bin. The lower panels show the ratios of the data to the pre-fit background prediction and post-fit background yield as red open squares and blue points, respectively. The gray band in the lower panels indicates the systematic component of the post-fit background uncertainty. The vertical bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow.

Distributions of M(WV) for the data and post-fit backgrounds (stacked histograms), in the SRs of the electron (left) and muon (right) channels in the merged regime. The template for one signal hypothesis is shown overlaid as a red solid line. The overflow is included in the last bin. The lower panels show the ratios of the data to the pre-fit background prediction and post-fit background yield as red open squares and blue points, respectively. The gray band in the lower panels indicates the systematic component of the post-fit background uncertainty. The vertical bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. The last bin includes overflow.

Observed and expected 95% CL intervals on the parameters of quartic operators in the WV and ZV channels, and their combination.

Measured and expected signal strength μ for EW ZV production.

Observed (black markers) and expected distributions of number of jets after event selection. The hatched (grey) areas denote the systematic (total) uncertainties in the expected yields. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between observed and expected distributions. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range. The entry Background corresponds to the sum of all the SM predictions.

Observed (black markers) and expected distributions of number of b tagged jets after event selection. The hatched (grey) areas denote the systematic (total) uncertainties in the expected yields. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between observed and expected distributions. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range. The entry Background corresponds to the sum of all the SM predictions.

Difference between $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ and $p_{\mathrm{T,rec.}}^\text{miss}$ as a function of the $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ for signal events. The mean difference between the generated and the $p_{\mathrm{T,rec.}}^\text{miss}$ per bin is shown as solid line. The results for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}$ corrected by the DNN regression (light blue), derived with the PUPPI algorithm (red), and the PF algorithm (orange) are shown. A simulated sample for the 2018 data-taking period is used.

Difference between $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ and $p_{\mathrm{T,rec.}}^\text{miss}$ as a function of the $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ for signal events. The dashed line shows the standard deviation $\sigma$, which corresponds to the resolution of the $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ and $p_{\mathrm{T,rec.}}^\text{miss}$ difference. The results for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}$ corrected by the DNN regression (light blue), derived with the PUPPI algorithm (red), and the PF algorithm (orange) are shown. A simulated sample for the 2018 data-taking period is used.

Difference between $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ and $p_{\mathrm{T,rec.}}^\text{miss}$ as a function of the number of primary vertices for signal events. The mean difference between the generated and the $p_{\mathrm{T,rec.}}^\text{miss}$ per bin is shown as solid line. The results for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}$ corrected by the DNN regression (light blue), derived with the PUPPI algorithm (red), and the PF algorithm (orange) are shown. A simulated sample for the 2018 data-taking period is used.

Difference between $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ and $p_{\mathrm{T,rec.}}^\text{miss}$ as a function of the $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ for signal events. The dashed line shows the standard deviation $\sigma$, which corresponds to the resolution of the $p_{\mathrm{T,gen.}}^\text{miss}$ and $p_{\mathrm{T,rec.}}^\text{miss}$ difference. The results for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}$ corrected by the DNN regression (light blue), derived with the PUPPI algorithm (red), and the PF algorithm (orange) are shown. A simulated sample for the 2018 data-taking period is used.

Results of the $\chi^{2}$ tests for the absolute and normalized differential cross section measurements for each of the predictions. The $\chi^{2}$ values including uncertainties on the predictions are given in parentheses in the table in the paper and in a separate column here.

The p-value of the $\chi^{2}$ tests for the absolute and normalized cross section measurements for each of the predictions. The resulting p-values including uncertainties on the predictions are given in parentheses in the table in the paper and in a separate column here.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from experimental uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from theory uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from experimental uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from theory uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from experimental uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0<$\phi$<0.56. Each group of four bins corresponds to $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ bins, and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ bin edges are indicated by vertical solid lines. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from experimental uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0.56<$\phi$<1.08. Each group of four bins corresponds to $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ bins, and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ bin edges are indicated by vertical solid lines. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from experimental uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 1.08<$\phi$<3.14. Each group of four bins corresponds to $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ bins, and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ bin edges are indicated by vertical solid lines. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from theory uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0<$\phi$<0.56. Each group of four bins corresponds to $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ bins, and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ bin edges are indicated by vertical solid lines. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from theory uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0.56<$\phi$<1.08. Each group of four bins corresponds to $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ bins, and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ bin edges are indicated by vertical solid lines. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Breakdown of the relative contribution from theory uncertainties in the differential cross section measurement as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 1.08<$\phi$<3.14. Each group of four bins corresponds to $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ bins, and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ bin edges are indicated by vertical solid lines. The statistical uncertainty (dark grey) takes the size of the available simulated samples and the recorded data into account. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

The observed (black markers) and simulated distributions of $p_{\mathrm{T,DNN}}^\text{miss}$ is shown. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The hatched (grey) areas indicate the systematic (total) uncertainty in the simulation. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of observed data to the expectation from MC simulation in each bin. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

The observed (black markers) and simulated distributions of $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T, DNN}}^{\text{miss}},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ is shown. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The hatched (grey) areas indicate the systematic (total) uncertainty in the simulation. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of observed data to the expectation from MC simulation in each bin. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

The observed (black markers) and simulated two-dimensional distribution of $p_{\mathrm{T,DNN}}^\text{miss}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T, DNN}}^{\text{miss}},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0<$\phi$<0.28 is shown. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The hatched (grey) areas indicate the systematic (total) uncertainty in the simulation. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of observed data to the expectation from MC simulation in each bin. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

The observed (black markers) and simulated two-dimensional distribution of $p_{\mathrm{T,DNN}}^\text{miss}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T, DNN}}^{\text{miss}},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0.28<$\phi$<0.56 is shown. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The hatched (grey) areas indicate the systematic (total) uncertainty in the simulation. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of observed data to the expectation from MC simulation in each bin. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

The observed (black markers) and simulated two-dimensional distribution of $p_{\mathrm{T,DNN}}^\text{miss}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T, DNN}}^{\text{miss}},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0.56<$\phi$<0.82 is shown. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The hatched (grey) areas indicate the systematic (total) uncertainty in the simulation. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of observed data to the expectation from MC simulation in each bin. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

The observed (black markers) and simulated two-dimensional distribution of $p_{\mathrm{T,DNN}}^\text{miss}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T, DNN}}^{\text{miss}},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0.82<$\phi$<1.08 is shown. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The hatched (grey) areas indicate the systematic (total) uncertainty in the simulation. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of observed data to the expectation from MC simulation in each bin. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

The observed (black markers) and simulated two-dimensional distribution of $p_{\mathrm{T,DNN}}^\text{miss}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T, DNN}}^{\text{miss}},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 1.08<$\phi$<2.14 is shown. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The hatched (grey) areas indicate the systematic (total) uncertainty in the simulation. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of observed data to the expectation from MC simulation in each bin. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

The observed (black markers) and simulated two-dimensional distribution of $p_{\mathrm{T,DNN}}^\text{miss}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T, DNN}}^{\text{miss}},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 2.14<$\phi$<3.2 is shown. Events from all data-taking periods and all channels are combined. The hatched (grey) areas indicate the systematic (total) uncertainty in the simulation. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of observed data to the expectation from MC simulation in each bin. The last bin includes all events above the plotted range.

Result of the closure test based on simulation accounting for potential BSM contributions based on a top squark pair production scenario with a stop mass of 525 GeV and a neutralino mass of 350 GeV. The potential BSM contribution is scaled by a factor of ten. The test is performed for the $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ using the nominal (black), the regularized (orange), and the bin-by-bin unfolding (purple), based on all data-taking periods combined. The unfolded distributions are compared to the expected distribution (red) based on the sum of the nominal dileptonic $t\bar{t}$ signal sample and BSM signal with the corresponding $\chi^2/\text{ndf}$ values given in the legend in square brackets. The distribution used for the response matrix, is shown in blue. The error bars correspond to the statistical uncertainty. The lower part shows the ratios between the unfolded and the expected distributions.

Result of the closure test based on simulation. The potential BSM contribution is scaled by a factor of ten. The test is performed for the 2D measurement of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ in the azimuthal angle range 0<$\phi$<0.56 using the nominal (black), the regularized (orange), and the bin-by-bin unfolding (purple), based on all data-taking periods combined. The unfolded distributions are compared to the expected distribution (red) based on the sum of the nominal dileptonic $t\bar{t}$ signal sample and BSM signal with the corresponding $\chi^2/\text{ndf}$ values given in the legend. The nominal distribution, used for the response matrix, is shown in blue. The error bars correspond to the statistical uncertainty. The lower part shows the ratios between the unfolded and the expected distributions.

Result of the closure test based on simulation. The potential BSM contribution is scaled by a factor of ten. The test is performed for the 2D measurement of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ in the azimuthal angle range 0.56<$\phi$<1.08 using the nominal (black), the regularized (orange), and the bin-by-bin unfolding (purple), based on all data-taking periods combined. The unfolded distributions are compared to the expected distribution (red) based on the sum of the nominal dileptonic $t\bar{t}$ signal sample and BSM signal with the corresponding $\chi^2/\text{ndf}$ values given in the legend. The nominal distribution, used for the response matrix, is shown in blue. The error bars correspond to the statistical uncertainty. The lower part shows the ratios between the unfolded and the expected distributions.

Result of the closure test based on simulation. The potential BSM contribution is scaled by a factor of ten. The test is performed for the 2D measurement of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ in the azimuthal angle range 1.08<$\phi$<3.14 using the nominal (black), the regularized (orange), and the bin-by-bin unfolding (purple), based on all data-taking periods combined. The unfolded distributions are compared to the expected distribution (red) based on the sum of the nominal dileptonic $t\bar{t}$ signal sample and BSM signal with the corresponding $\chi^2/\text{ndf}$ values given in the legend. The nominal distribution, used for the response matrix, is shown in blue. The error bars correspond to the statistical uncertainty. The lower part shows the ratios between the unfolded and the expected distributions.

The measured differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The measured differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The measured two-dimensional differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0<$\phi$<0.56 is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The measured two-dimensional differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0.56<$\phi$<1.08 is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The measured two-dimensional differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 1.08<$\phi$<3.14 is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The normalized measured differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The normalized measured differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The normalized measured two-dimensional differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0<$\phi$<0.56 is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The normalized measured two-dimensional differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 0.56<$\phi$<1.08 is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

The normalized measured two-dimensional differential signal cross section (black markers) as a function of $p_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu}$ and $\text{min}[\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\nu\nu},\vec{p}_{\text{T}}^{\ell})]$ for the azimuthal angle range 1.08<$\phi$<3.14 is shown. The theoretical predictions from POWHEG+PYTHIA (dark red), POWHEG+HERWIG (orange), MC@NLO+PYTHIA (purple), and the fixed-order NLO (light blue) and NNLO (brown) calculations are compared to the measurement. The total (statistical) uncertainty in the measurement is shown as an orange (dark grey) band. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between theoretical predictions and the measurement.

Signal strength and significance for $\text{t}\overline{\text{t}}\text{Z}(\text{Z}\to\text{b}\overline{\text{b}})$ decays with respect to the standard model expectation of unity.

Signal strength and significance for $\text{t}\overline{\text{t}}\text{Z}(\text{Z}\to\text{c}\overline{\text{c}})$ decays with respect to the standard model expectation of unity.

2D likelihood scans for $\kappa_{b}$ and $\kappa_{c}$ for $\text{t}\overline{\text{t}}\text{H}(\text{H}\to\text{c}\overline{\text{c}})$ and $\text{t}\overline{\text{t}}\text{H}(\text{H}\to\text{b}\overline{\text{b}})$.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the CR. Pass and Fail categories are shown. The high level of agreement between the model and the data in the Fail region is due to the nature of the background estimate. The lower panels show the ``Pull'' defined as $(\text{observed events}{-}\text{expected events})/\sqrt{\smash[b]{\sigma_\text{obs}^{2} + \sigma_\text{exp}^{2}}}$, where $\sigma_\text{obs}$ and $\sigma_\text{exp}$ are the total uncertainties in the observation and the background estimation, respectively.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the MR. Pass and Fail categories are shown. The expected contribution from the signal benchmark with $M_{X} = 2200\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $M_{Y} = 250\,\mathrm{GeV}$ is overlaid in the MR Pass, assuming a production cross section of 5 fb. The high level of agreement between the model and the data in the Fail region is due to the nature of the background estimate.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the MR. Pass and Fail categories are shown. The expected contribution from the signal benchmark with $M_{X} = 2200\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $M_{Y} = 250\,\mathrm{GeV}$ is overlaid in the MR Pass, assuming a production cross section of 5 fb. The high level of agreement between the model and the data in the Fail region is due to the nature of the background estimate.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the MR. Pass and Fail categories are shown.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the MR. Pass and Fail categories are shown.

The expected and observed 95% confidence level upper limits on the cross section $\sigma(\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{X} \to (\mathrm{H} \to b\bar{b})(\mathrm{Y} \to WW \to 4q))$ are shown for different values of $M_X$ and $M_Y$. The limits have been evaluated in discrete steps corresponding to the centers of the boxes. The numbers in the boxes are given in fb. In addition to the observed and median expected limits, the expected limits at $\pm1\sigma$ and $\pm2\sigma$ quantiles are also provided. These represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The median expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) 95% confidence level upper limits on the main and three alternative signal scenarios as a function of $M_{X}$. The inner (green) band and outer (yellow) band represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The median expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) 95% confidence level upper limits on the main and three alternative signal scenarios as a function of $M_{X}$. The inner (green) band and outer (yellow) band represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The median expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) 95% confidence level upper limits on the main and three alternative signal scenarios as a function of $M_{X}$. The inner (green) band and outer (yellow) band represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The median expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) 95% confidence level upper limits on the main and three alternative signal scenarios as a function of $M_{X}$. The inner (green) band and outer (yellow) band represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

Selection efficiency as a function of MX and MY

Selection efficiency as a function of MX for fixed MY

Selection efficiency as a function of MX for fixed MY

Selection efficiency as a function of MX for fixed MY

The measured differential cross-section for $W^+$ in bins of the $p_T$ of the $W$.

Statistical correlations of angular coefficients and differential cross-section for $W^-$ as a function of $p_{T}(W)$. Included as a CSV file due to file size.

Statistical correlations of angular coefficients and differential cross-section for $W^+$ as a function of $p_{T}(W)$. Included as a CSV file due to file size.

The d$^{2}\sigma$/dydp$_{\mathrm{T}}$ production cross section of D$^{0}$ for $8 < p_{\mathrm{T}} < 12$ GeV in ultraperipheral PbPb collisions.

Measured fiducial cross section of the VBF production mode.

Correlation matrix for fit configuration 1

Correlation matrix for fit configuration 2

Correlation matrix for fit configuration 3

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

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

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

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

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

Observed 95&percnt; confidence level (CL) exclusion limits for the (a)&nbsp;|U_e|² and (b)&nbsp;|U_&mu;|² mixing parameters versus the HNL mass. The expected (dashed line) exclusion limits are also shown. The 1&sigma; and 2&sigma; uncertainty bands around the expected exclusion limit reflect uncertainties in signal and background yields.

Data and estimated background comparison in the three lepton SRs defined for the e^&plusmn;e^&plusmn;&mu;^&#8723; decay mode. The hatched band represents the total uncertainty of the background. These signal regions are not orthogonal by construction, and data events can be found in more than one signal region.

Data and estimated background comparison in the three lepton SRs defined for the &mu;^&plusmn;&mu;^&plusmn;e^&#8723; decay mode. The hatched band represents the total uncertainty of the background. These signal regions are not orthogonal by construction, and data events can be found in more than one signal region.

Data and estimated background comparison in the two lepton SRs defined for the &mu;^&plusmn;&mu;^&plusmn;e^&#8723; decay mode. The hatched band represents the total uncertainty of the background. These signal regions are not orthogonal by construction, and data events can be found in more than one signal region.

Data and estimated background comparison in a region enriched in WZ SM processes, defined with N_lept^signal =3, m_T &gt;80&nbsp;GeV and SC leptons with p_T &gt; 30&nbsp;GeV, in addition to the preselection defined in Section&nbsp;5. Events entering the SRs defined in Section&nbsp;5 are vetoed. The last bin includes overflow. The uncertainties shown with hashed bands, include only the statistical uncertainties and the full uncertainties associated with the data-driven background estimates. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields.

Identification of the three lepton signal region chosen to set the limits for the e^&plusmn;e^&plusmn;&mu;^&#8723; decay mode. The observed (continuous line) and expected (dashed line) exclusion limits at 95&percnt; CL are also shown.

Identification of the three lepton signal region chosen to set the limits for the &mu;^&plusmn;&mu;^&plusmn;e^&#8723; decay mode. The observed (continuous line) and expected (dashed line) exclusion limits at 95&percnt; CL are also shown.

Identification of the two lepton signal region chosen to set the limits for the &mu;^&plusmn;&mu;^&plusmn;e^&#8723; decay mode. The observed (continuous line) and expected (dashed line) exclusion limits at 95&percnt; CL are also shown. The grey boxed area highlights the regions where the fit is not converging for the observed limit, given the low statistics. While they do not yield a result independently, they are further used in a combined fit with the three lepton regions. In these fits, the signal is floated simultaneously in the two lepton and 3&#8467; regions, in which case there are enough statistics to converge on a limit. In this high mass region, the two lepton region gives a minor improvement to the limits in the combined fit when compared to the 3&#8467; only result.

Observed 95&percnt; confidence-level exclusion in |U_&mu;|² versus the HNL mass, as obtained with the two lepton and three lepton signal regions, before the combination. The expected (dashed line) exclusion limits are also shown.

Observed 95&percnt; confidence-level exclusion in |U_&mu;|² versus the HNL mass, as obtained with the two lepton (blue) and three lepton (magenta) signal regions, before the combination. The expected (dashed line) exclusion limits are also shown. For complexness, also the combined two lepton and three lepton limits (black) are displayed, together with the 1&sigma; and 2&sigma; of the median expected limit.

Observed 95&percnt; confidence-level exclusion in |U_&mu;|² versus the HNL mass, as obtained with the three lepton only signal regions. The expected (dashed line) exclusion limits are also shown.

Observed 95&percnt; confidence-level exclusion in |U_&mu;|² versus the HNL mass, as obtained with the two lepton only signal regions. The expected (dashed line) exclusion limits are also shown. The grey boxed area highlights the regions where the fit is not converging for the observed limit, given the low statistics. While they do not yield a result independently, they are further used in a combined fit with the three lepton regions. In these fits, the signal is floated simultaneously in the two lepton and 3&#8467; regions, in which case there are enough statistics to converge on a limit. In this high mass region, the two lepton region gives a minor improvement to the limits in the combined fit when compared to the 3&#8467; only result.