Showing 10 of 343 results
Jet substructure quantities are measured using jets groomed with the soft-drop grooming procedure in dijet events from 32.9 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions collected with the ATLAS detector at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. These observables are sensitive to a wide range of QCD phenomena. Some observables, such as the jet mass and opening angle between the two subjets which pass the soft-drop condition, can be described by a high-order (resummed) series in the strong coupling constant $\alpha_S$. Other observables, such as the momentum sharing between the two subjets, are nearly independent of $\alpha_S$. These observables can be constructed using all interacting particles or using only charged particles reconstructed in the inner tracking detectors. Track-based versions of these observables are not collinear safe, but are measured more precisely, and universal non-perturbative functions can absorb the collinear singularities. The unfolded data are directly compared with QCD calculations and hadron-level Monte Carlo simulations. The measurements are performed in different pseudorapidity regions, which are then used to extract quark and gluon jet shapes using the predicted quark and gluon fractions in each region. All of the parton shower and analytical calculations provide an excellent description of the data in most regions of phase space.
Data from Fig 6a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 6b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 6c. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 6d. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 6e. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 6f. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 7a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 7b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 7c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 7d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 7e. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 7f. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 8a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 8b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 8c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 8d. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 8e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 8f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 14a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 14b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 4b. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 21b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 5a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 5b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 14c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 14d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 4c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 4d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 5c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 5d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 14e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 14f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 4e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 4f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 5e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 5f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 14a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 14b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 4a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 4b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 5a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 5b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 14c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 14d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 4c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 4d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 5c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 5d. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 14e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 14f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 4e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 4f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 5e. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 5f. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 36-40a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in (300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity) and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 81-85a. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 36-40b. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 81-85b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 36-40c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 81-85c. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 51-55a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 101-105a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 51-55b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 101-105b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 51-55c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 101-105c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 66-70a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 106-110a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 66-70b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 106-110b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 66-70c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 106-110c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 26-30a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 71-75a. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 26-30b. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 71-75b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 26-30c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 71-75c. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 41-45a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 86-90a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 41-45b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 86-90b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 41-45c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 86-90c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 56-60a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 101-105a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 56-60b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 101-105b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 56-60c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 101-105c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 31-35a. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 76-80a. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 31-35b. The unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 76-80b. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 31-35c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 76-80c. The unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from Fig 46-50a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 91-95a. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 46-50b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 91-95b. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 46-50c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 91-95c. The unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from Fig 61-65a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 106-110a. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 61-65b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 106-110b. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 61-65c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from Fig 106-110c. The unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 6a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 15a. Theextracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 6b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 15b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 6c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 15c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 7a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 16a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 7b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 16b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 7c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 16c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 8a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 17a. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 8b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 17b. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 8c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 17c. The extracted quark-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 6a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 15a. Theextracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 6b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 15b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 6c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from Fig 15c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 7a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 16a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 7b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 16b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 7c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 16c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 8a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 17a. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 8b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 17b. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 8c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from Fig 17c. The extracted gluon-distribution from the unfolded charged-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with 600 < $p_T$ < 800 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 99a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 100a. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 99b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 100b. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 99c. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 100c. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 101a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 102a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 101b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 102b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 101c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 102c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 103a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 104a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 103b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 104b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 103c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 104c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 105a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 106a. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 105b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 106b. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 105c. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 106c. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 107a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 108a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 107b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 108b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 107c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 108c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 109a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 110a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 109b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 110b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 109c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 110c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 111a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 112a. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 111b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 112b. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 111c. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 112c. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 113a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 114a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 113b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 114b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 113c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 114c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 115a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 116a. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 115b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 116b. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 115c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 116c. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$.
Data from FigAux 99d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 100d. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 99e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 100e. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 99f. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 100f. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 101d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 102d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 101e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 102e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 101f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 102f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 103d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 104d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 103e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 104e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 103f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 104f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 105d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 106d. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 105e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 106e. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 105f. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 106f. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 107d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 108d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 107e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 108e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 107f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 108f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 109d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 110d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 109e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 110e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 109f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 110f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more central of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 111d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 112d. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 111e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.
Data from FigAux 112e. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 111f. The full covariance matrices for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 112f. The full covariance matrices for the charged-particle $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.
Data from FigAux 113d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 114d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 113e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 114e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 113f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 114f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $z_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $z_g$ from 0.0 to 0.5.
Data from FigAux 115d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 116d. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 0, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 115e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 116e. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 115f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
Data from FigAux 116f. The full covariance matrices for the all-particle $R_g$ distribution for the more forward of the two anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$ > 300 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$. Each set of 6 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {300, 400, 600, 800, 1000, infinity } and 6 bins in $r_g$ (0.06310, 0.10000, 0.15849, 0.25119, 0.39811, 0.63096, 0.80000).
The production cross-sections for $W^{\pm}$ and $Z$ bosons are measured using ATLAS data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 4.0 pb$^{-1}$ collected at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=2.76$ TeV. The decay channels $W \rightarrow \ell \nu$ and $Z \rightarrow \ell \ell $ are used, where $\ell$ can be an electron or a muon. The cross-sections are presented for a fiducial region defined by the detector acceptance and are also extrapolated to the full phase space for the total inclusive production cross-section. The combined (average) total inclusive cross-sections for the electron and muon channels are: \begin{eqnarray} \sigma^{\text{tot}}_{W^{+}\rightarrow \ell \nu}& = & 2312 \pm 26\ (\text{stat.})\ \pm 27\ (\text{syst.}) \pm 72\ (\text{lumi.}) \pm 30\ (\text{extr.})\text{pb} \nonumber, \\ \sigma^{\text{tot}}_{W^{-}\rightarrow \ell \nu}& = & 1399 \pm 21\ (\text{stat.})\ \pm 17\ (\text{syst.}) \pm 43\ (\text{lumi.}) \pm 21\ (\text{extr.})\text{pb} \nonumber, \\ \sigma^{\text{tot}}_{Z \rightarrow \ell \ell}& = & 323.4 \pm 9.8\ (\text{stat.}) \pm 5.0\ (\text{syst.}) \pm 10.0\ (\text{lumi.}) \pm 5.5 (\text{extr.}) \text{pb} \nonumber. \end{eqnarray} Measured ratios and asymmetries constructed using these cross-sections are also presented. These observables benefit from full or partial cancellation of many systematic uncertainties that are correlated between the different measurements.
Measured fiducial cross section times leptonic branching ratio for W+ production in the W+ -> e+ nu final state.
Measured fiducial cross section times leptonic branching ratio for W+ production in the W+ -> mu+ nu final state.
Measured fiducial cross section times leptonic branching ratio for W- production in the W- -> e- nu final state.
Measured fiducial cross section times leptonic branching ratio for W- production in the W- -> mu- nu final state.
Measured fiducial cross section times leptonic branching ratio for Z/gamma* production in the Z/gamma* -> e+ e- final state.
Measured fiducial cross section times leptonic branching ratio for Z/gamma* production in the Z/gamma* -> mu+ mu- final state.
Measured total cross section times leptonic branching ratio for W+ production in the W+ -> e+ nu final state.
Measured total cross section times leptonic branching ratio for W+ production in the W+ -> mu+ nu final state.
Measured total cross section times leptonic branching ratio for W- production in the W- -> e- nu final state.
Measured total cross section times leptonic branching ratio for W- production in the W- -> mu- nu final state.
Measured total cross section times leptonic branching ratio for Z/gamma* production in the Z/gamma* -> e+ e- final state.
Measured total cross section times leptonic branching ratio for Z/gamma* production in the Z/gamma* -> mu+ mu- final state.
Combined fiducial cross-section measurements for W+ boson production in the W+ -> l+ nu (l = e, mu) final state.
Combined fiducial cross-section measurements for W- boson production in the W- -> l- nu (l = e, mu) final state.
Combined fiducial cross-section measurements for W boson production in the W -> l nu (l = e, mu) final state.
Combined fiducial cross-section measurements for Z/gamma* production in the Z/gamma* -> l- l+ (l = e, mu) final state.
Combined total cross-section measurements for W+ boson production in the W+ -> l+ nu (l = e, mu) final state.
Combined total cross-section measurements for W- boson production in the W- -> l- nu (l = e, mu) final state.
Combined total cross-section measurements for W boson production in the W -> l nu (l = e, mu) final state.
Combined total cross-section measurements for Z/gamma* production in the Z/gamma* -> l- l+ (l = e, mu) final state.
Measured fiducial cross-section ratio R_{W+-/Z} = sigma (W+/- -> l+/- nu/nubar) / sigma (Z/gamma^* -> l+ l-) where l = e, mu.
Measured fiducial cross-section ratio R_{W+/W-} = sigma (W+ -> l+ nu) / sigma (W- -> l- nubar) where l = e, mu.
Measured charge asymmetry in W-boson production A_{l} = ( sigma (W+ -> l+ nu) - sigma (W- -> l- nubar) ) / ( sigma (W+ -> l+ nu) + sigma (W- -> l- nubar) ) where l = e, mu.
The ratio of measured W+ cross-sections in the electron and muon decay channels R_{W+} = sigma (W+ -> e+ nu) / sigma (W+ -> mu+ nu)
The ratio of measured W- cross-sections in the electron and muon decay channels R_{W-} = sigma (W- -> e- nu) / sigma (W- -> mu- nu)
The ratio of measured W cross-sections in the electron and muon decay channels R_{W} = sigma (W -> e nu) / sigma (W -> mu nu)
The ratio of measured Z/gamma^* cross-sections in the electron and muon decay channels R_{Z/gamma^*} = sigma (Z/gamma^* -> e+ e-) / sigma (Z/gamma^* -> mu+ mu-)
Correlation coefficients among (W- -> l- nubar), (W+ -> l+ nu), (Z/gamma^* -> l+ l-) where (l = e, mu) excluding the common normalisation uncertainty due to the luminosity calibration.
The prevalence of hadronic jets at the LHC requires that a deep understanding of jet formation and structure is achieved in order to reach the highest levels of experimental and theoretical precision. There have been many measurements of jet substructure at the LHC and previous colliders, but the targeted observables mix physical effects from various origins. Based on a recent proposal to factorize physical effects, this Letter presents a double-differential cross-section measurement of the Lund jet plane using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV proton-proton collision data collected with the ATLAS detector using jets with transverse momentum above 675 GeV. The measurement uses charged particles to achieve a fine angular resolution and is corrected for acceptance and detector effects. Several parton shower Monte Carlo models are compared with the data. No single model is found to be in agreement with the measured data across the entire plane.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for use in MC tuning.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 0.00 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 0.33.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 0.33 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 0.67.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 0.67 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 1.00.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 1.00 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 1.33.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 1.33 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 1.67.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 1.67 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 2.00.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 2.00 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 2.33.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 2.33 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 2.67.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 2.67 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 3.00.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 3.00 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 3.33.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 3.33 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 3.67.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 3.67 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 4.00.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single vertical slice of the Lund jet plane between 4.00 < ln(R/#DeltaR) < 4.33.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 0.69 < ln(1/z) < 0.97.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 0.97 < ln(1/z) < 1.25.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 1.25 < ln(1/z) < 1.52.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 1.52 < ln(1/z) < 1.80.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 1.80 < ln(1/z) < 2.08.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 2.08 < ln(1/z) < 2.36.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 2.36 < ln(1/z) < 2.63.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 2.63 < ln(1/z) < 2.91.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 2.91 < ln(1/z) < 3.19.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 3.19 < ln(1/z) < 3.47.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 3.47 < ln(1/z) < 3.74.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 3.74 < ln(1/z) < 4.02.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 4.02 < ln(1/z) < 4.30.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 4.30 < ln(1/z) < 4.57.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 4.57 < ln(1/z) < 4.85.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 4.85 < ln(1/z) < 5.13.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 5.13 < ln(1/z) < 5.41.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 5.41 < ln(1/z) < 5.68.
Normalized differential cross-section of the Lund jet plane. The first systematic uncertainty is detector systematics, the second is background systematic uncertainties. The data is presented as a 1D distribution, for a single horizontal slice of the Lund jet plane between 5.68 < ln(1/z) < 5.96.
The summed covariance matrix of all systematic and statistical uncertainties associated with the measurement in bins of $\ln{(1/z)} \times \ln{(R/\Delta R)}$.
The summed covariance matrix of all statistical uncertainties associated with the measurement in bins of $\ln{(1/z)} \times \ln{(R/\Delta R)}$.
$Z$ boson events at the Large Hadron Collider can be selected with high purity and are sensitive to a diverse range of QCD phenomena. As a result, these events are often used to probe the nature of the strong force, improve Monte Carlo event generators, and search for deviations from Standard Model predictions. All previous measurements of $Z$ boson production characterize the event properties using a small number of observables and present the results as differential cross sections in predetermined bins. In this analysis, a machine learning method called OmniFold is used to produce a simultaneous measurement of twenty-four $Z$+jets observables using $139$ fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector. Unlike any previous fiducial differential cross-section measurement, this result is presented unbinned as a dataset of particle-level events, allowing for flexible re-use in a variety of contexts and for new observables to be constructed from the twenty-four measured observables.
Differential cross-section in bins of dimuon $p_\text{T}$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of dimuon rapidity. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading muon $p_\mathrm{T]$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading muon $p_\mathrm{T]$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading muon $\eta$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading muon $\eta$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading muon $\phi$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading muon $\phi$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet $p_\mathrm{T]$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading charged particle jet $p_\mathrm{T]$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet rapidity. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading charged particle jet rapidity. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet azimuth. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading charged particle jet azimuth. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet mass. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading charged particle jet mass. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet constituent multiplicity. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading charged particle jet constituent multiplicity. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet $\tau_1$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading charged particle jet $\tau_1$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet $\tau_2$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading charged particle jet $\tau_2$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet $\tau_3$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of subleading charged particle jet $\tau_3$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of leading charged particle jet $\tau_{21}$. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
Differential cross-section in bins of $\Delta R$ between the leading charged particle jet and the dilepton system. The actual measurement is unbinned and available with examples at <a href="https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024">gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/public/sm-z-jets-omnifold-2024</a>
This paper presents a measurement of quantities related to the formation of jets from high-energy quarks and gluons (fragmentation). Jets with transverse momentum 100 GeV $<p_T<$ 2.5 TeV and pseudorapidity $|\eta| < 2.1$ from an integrated luminosity of 33 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV proton-proton collisions are reconstructed with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Charged-particle tracks with $p_T > 500$ MeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$ are used to probe the detailed structure of the jet. The fragmentation properties of the more forward and the more central of the two leading jets from each event are studied. The data are unfolded to correct for detector resolution and acceptance effects. Comparisons with parton shower Monte Carlo generators indicate that existing models provide a reasonable description of the data across a wide range of phase space, but there are also significant differences. Furthermore, the data are interpreted in the context of quark- and gluon-initiated jets by exploiting the rapidity dependence of the jet flavor fraction. A first measurement of the charged-particle multiplicity using model-independent jet labels (topic modeling) provides a promising alternative to traditional quark and gluon extractions using input from simulation. The simulations provide a reasonable description of the quark-like data across the jet $p_T$ range presented in this measurement, but the gluon-like data have systematically fewer charged particles than the simulations.
$\langle n_{ch} \rangle$, forward jet.
$\langle n_{ch} \rangle$, central jet.
$\langle \zeta \rangle$, forward jet.
$\langle \zeta \rangle$, central jet.
$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, forward jet.
$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, central jet.
$\langle r \rangle$, forward jet.
$\langle r \rangle$, central jet.
$\langle n_{ch} \rangle$, both jets.
$\langle \zeta \rangle$, combined jet.
$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, both jets.
$\langle r \rangle$, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.
$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.
$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.
$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.
$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.
$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.
$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.
$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.
$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.
$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.
The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average number of tracks per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.
The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average fragmentation function per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.
The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average relative $p_T$ per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.
The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average r per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.
The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the number of tracks. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.
The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the fragmentation function. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.
The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the relative $p_T$. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.
The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the r. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.
The dynamics of isolated-photon plus two-jet production in $pp$ collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV are studied with the ATLAS detector at the LHC using a dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$. Cross sections are measured as functions of a variety of observables, including angular correlations and invariant masses of the objects in the final state, $\gamma+jet+jet$. Measurements are also performed in phase-space regions enriched in each of the two underlying physical mechanisms, namely direct and fragmentation processes. The measurements cover the range of photon (jet) transverse momenta from 150 GeV (100 GeV) to 2 TeV. The tree-level plus parton-shower predictions from SHERPA and PYTHIA as well as the next-to-leading-order QCD predictions from SHERPA are compared with the measurements. The next-to-leading-order QCD predictions describe the data adequately in shape and normalisation except for regions of phase space such as those with high values of the invariant mass or rapidity separation of the two jets, where the predictions overestimate the data.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\textrm{jet}}$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $|y^{\textrm{jet}}|$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta y^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}}$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta \phi^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}}$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta y^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta \phi^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $m^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $m^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the total phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\textrm{jet}}$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $|y^{\textrm{jet}}|$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta y^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}}$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta \phi^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}}$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta y^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta \phi^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $m^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $m^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the fragmentation-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\textrm{jet}}$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $|y^{\textrm{jet}}|$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta y^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}}$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta \phi^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}}$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta y^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $\Delta \phi^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $m^{\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
Measured cross sections for isolated-photon plus two-jet production as functions of $m^{\gamma-\textrm{jet}-\textrm{jet}}$ for the direct-enriched phase-space. The predictions from Sherpa NLO are also included.
A measurement of novel event shapes quantifying the isotropy of collider events is performed in 140 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions with $\sqrt s=13$ TeV centre-of-mass energy recorded with the ATLAS detector at CERN's Large Hadron Collider. These event shapes are defined as the Wasserstein distance between collider events and isotropic reference geometries. This distance is evaluated by solving optimal transport problems, using the 'Energy-Mover's Distance'. Isotropic references with cylindrical and circular symmetries are studied, to probe the symmetries of interest at hadron colliders. The novel event-shape observables defined in this way are infrared- and collinear-safe, have improved dynamic range and have greater sensitivity to isotropic radiation patterns than other event shapes. The measured event-shape variables are corrected for detector effects, and presented in inclusive bins of jet multiplicity and the scalar sum of the two leading jets' transverse momenta. The measured distributions are provided as inputs to future Monte Carlo tuning campaigns and other studies probing fundamental properties of QCD and the production of hadronic final states up to the TeV-scale.
IRing2 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=2
IRing2 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=3
IRing2 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=4
IRing2 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=5
IRing2 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=2
IRing2 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=3
IRing2 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=4
IRing2 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=5
IRing2 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=2
IRing2 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=3
IRing2 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=4
IRing2 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=5
IRing128 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=2
IRing128 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=3
IRing128 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=4
IRing128 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=5
IRing128 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=2
IRing128 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=3
IRing128 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=4
IRing128 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=5
IRing128 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=2
IRing128 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=3
IRing128 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=4
IRing128 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=5
ICyl16 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=2
ICyl16 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=3
ICyl16 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=4
ICyl16 for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=5
ICyl16 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=2
ICyl16 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=3
ICyl16 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=4
ICyl16 for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=5
ICyl16 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=2
ICyl16 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=3
ICyl16 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=4
ICyl16 for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=5
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 1)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 2)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 3)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 4)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 5)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 6)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 7)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 8)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 9)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 10)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 11)
IRing2 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 12)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 13)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 14)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 15)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 16)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 17)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 18)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 19)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 20)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 21)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 22)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 23)
IRing128 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 24)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 25)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 26)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 27)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=500 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 28)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 29)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 30)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 31)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=1000 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 32)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=2 (Table 33)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=3 (Table 34)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=4 (Table 35)
ICyl16 covariance for HT2>=1500 GeV, NJets>=5 (Table 36)
IRing2 covariance, complete
1-IRing128 covariance, complete
1-ICyl16 covariance, complete
Properties of the underlying-event in $pp$ interactions are investigated primarily via the strange hadrons $K_{S}^{0}$, $\Lambda$ and $\bar\Lambda$, as reconstructed using the ATLAS detector at the LHC in minimum-bias $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. The hadrons are reconstructed via the identification of the displaced two-particle vertices corresponding to the decay modes $K_{S}^{0}\rightarrow\pi^+\pi^-$, $\Lambda\rightarrow\pi^-p$ and $\bar\Lambda\rightarrow\pi^+\bar{p}$. These are used in the construction of underlying-event observables in azimuthal regions computed relative to the leading charged-particle jet in the event. None of the hadronisation and underlying-event physics models considered can describe the data over the full kinematic range considered. Events with a leading charged-particle jet in the range of $10 < p_T \leq 40$ GeV are studied using the number of prompt charged particles in the transverse region. The ratio $N(\Lambda + \bar\Lambda)/N(K_{S}^{0})$ as a function of the number of such charged particles varies only slightly over this range. This disagrees with the expectations of some of the considered Monte Carlo models.
Mean multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $K^{0}_{S}$ to prompt charged particles in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to prompt charged particles in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the multiplicity of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ in the away region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ in the towards region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ in the transverse region vs. leading-jet $p_{T}$
Mean multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Mean multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Mean multiplicity of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the transverse region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the away region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Mean scalar sum-$p_{T}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ per unit $(\eta, \phi)$ in the towards region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the towards region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Ratio of the scalar sum-pt of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{S}$ in the transverse region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ in the away region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ in the towards region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Mean-$p_{T}$ of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ in the transverse region vs. $N_\textrm{ch,trans}$
Single- and double-differential cross-section measurements are presented for the production of top-quark pairs, in the lepton + jets channel at particle and parton level. Two topologies, resolved and boosted, are considered and the results are presented as a function of several kinematic variables characterising the top and $t\bar{t}$ system and jet multiplicities. The study was performed using data from $pp$ collisions at centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV collected in 2015 and 2016 by the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC), corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $36~\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$. Due to the large $t\bar{t}$ cross-section at the LHC, such measurements allow a detailed study of the properties of top-quark production and decay, enabling precision tests of several Monte Carlo generators and fixed-order Standard Model predictions. Overall, there is good agreement between the theoretical predictions and the data.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,1}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,1}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,2}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,2}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|y_{boost}^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|y_{boost}^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Total cross-section at particle level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 200.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 400.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 400.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 550.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 550.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 700.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 700.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1000.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 200.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 400.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 400.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 550.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 550.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 700.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 700.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1000.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 200.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 400.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 400.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 550.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 550.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 700.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 700.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1000.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 200.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 400.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 400.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 550.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 550.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 700.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 700.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1000.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 60.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 60.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 120.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 120.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 200.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 200.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 300.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 300.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 60.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 60.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 120.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 120.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 200.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 200.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 300.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 300.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t,had}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 3.5 < $N^{jets}$ < 4.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 4.5 < $N^{jets}$ < 5.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 5.5 < $N^{jets}$ < 6.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 6.5 < $N^{jets}$ < 7.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 3.5 < $N^{jets}$ < 4.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 4.5 < $N^{jets}$ < 5.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 5.5 < $N^{jets}$ < 6.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $\Delta\phi(t,\bar{t})$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 6.5 < $N^{jets}$ < 7.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 4.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 5.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ = 6.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ vs $N^{jets}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in $N^{jets}$ $\geq$ 7.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 0.7 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.7 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 1.4 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1.4 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 0.7 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.7 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 1.4 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1.4 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.4 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.4 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.8 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.8 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.2 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1.2 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.4 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.4 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.8 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.8 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.2 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1.2 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.4 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.4 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.8 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.8 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.2 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1.2 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.4 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.4 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.8 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.8 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.2 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 1.2 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 30.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 30.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 80.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 80.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 190.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 190.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 800.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 30.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 30.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 80.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 80.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 190.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the resolved topology in 190.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 800.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|y_{boost}^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|y_{boost}^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $\chi_{tt}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $|y^{t}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t}|$ < 0.75 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $|y^{t}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.75 < $|y^{t}|$ < 1.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $|y^{t}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.5 < $|y^{t}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $|y^{t}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t}|$ < 0.75 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $|y^{t}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.75 < $|y^{t}|$ < 1.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $|y^{t}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.5 < $|y^{t}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 80.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 80.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 180.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 180.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 330.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 330.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 800.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 80.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 80.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 180.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 180.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 330.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 330.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 800.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 325.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 500.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 500.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 700.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 700.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1000.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 325.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 500.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 500.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 700.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 700.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1000.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.0 GeV < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.5 GeV < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.1 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.1 GeV < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.7 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.7 GeV < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.5 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.0 GeV < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.5 GeV < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.1 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.1 GeV < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.7 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.7 GeV < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.5 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 325.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 500.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 500.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 700.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 700.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1000.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 325.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 500.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 500.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 700.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 700.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1000.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.5 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.1 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.1 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.7 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.7 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 0.5 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.1 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.1 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.7 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at parton level in the resolved topology in 1.7 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.5 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $y^{t}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $y^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the resolved topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,1}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,1}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,2}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,2}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $\chi^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,lep}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $|p_{out}^{t,lep}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $N^{subjets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $N^{subjets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Total cross-section at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 40.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 40.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 150.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 150.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 40.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 40.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 150.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 150.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 1.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 1.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 1.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 1.0 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 2.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 1.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $|y^{t,had}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 1.0 < $|y^{t,had}|$ < 2.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 490.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1160.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 1160.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 3000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 490.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1160.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 1160.0 GeV < $m^{t\bar{t}}$ < 3000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 350.0 GeV < $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 780.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 780.0 GeV < $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2500.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 350.0 GeV < $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 780.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 780.0 GeV < $H_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 2500.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 40.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 40.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 150.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 150.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 40.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 40.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 150.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 150.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ < 1000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.65 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.65 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.3 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 1.3 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.0 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 0.65 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 0.65 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 1.3 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ at particle level in the boosted topology in 1.3 < $|y^{t\bar{t}}|$ < 2.0 . Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 0.5. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 2.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ $\geq$ 3.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 0.5. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 2.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t,had}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ $\geq$ 3.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 0.5. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ $\geq$ 2.5. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 0.5. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ $\geq$ 2.5. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 0.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 1.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ $\geq$ 2.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 0.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ = 1.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $N^{extra jets}$ at particle level in the boosted topology in $N^{extra jets}$ $\geq$ 2.0. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ at parton level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Total cross-section at parton level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the boosted topology in 350.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t}$ < 550.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Relative double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the boosted topology in 550.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the boosted topology in 350.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t}$ < 550.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute double-differential cross-section as a function of $m^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T}^{t}$ at parton level in the boosted topology in 550.0 GeV < $p_{T}^{t}$ < 2000.0 GeV. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
A search for a heavy charged-boson resonance decaying into a charged lepton (electron or muon) and a neutrino is reported. A data sample of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC during 2015-2018 is used in the search. The observed transverse mass distribution computed from the lepton and missing transverse momenta is consistent with the distribution expected from the Standard Model, and upper limits on the cross section for $pp \to W^\prime \to \ell\nu$ are extracted ($\ell = e$ or $\mu$). These vary between 1.3 pb and 0.05 fb depending on the resonance mass in the range between 0.15 and 7.0 TeV at 95% confidence level for the electron and muon channels combined. Gauge bosons with a mass below 6.0 TeV and 5.1 TeV are excluded in the electron and muon channels, respectively, in a model with a resonance that has couplings to fermions identical to those of the Standard Model $W$ boson. Cross-section limits are also provided for resonances with several fixed $\Gamma / m$ values in the range between 1% and 15%. Model-independent limits are derived in single-bin signal regions defined by a varying minimum transverse mass threshold. The resulting visible cross-section upper limits range between 4.6 (15) pb and 22 (22) ab as the threshold increases from 130 (110) GeV to 5.1 (5.1) TeV in the electron (muon) channel.
Transverse mass distribution for events satisfying all selection criteria in the electron channel.
Transverse mass distribution for events satisfying all selection criteria in the muon channel.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for SSM $W^\prime$ production and decay to the electron+neutrino channel as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for SSM $W^\prime$ production and decay to the muon+neutrino channel as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Combined (electron and muon channels) upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for SSM $W^\prime$ production and decay to a single lepton generation as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Observed upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for generic $W^\prime$ production and decay to the electron+neutrino channel as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Observed upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for generic $W^\prime$ production and decay to the muon+neutrino channel as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Combined (electron and muon channels) observed upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for generic $W^\prime$ production and decay to a single lepton generation as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Observed upper limits at the 95% CL on the visible cross section in the electron+neutrino channel as a function of the transverse mass threshold.
Observed upper limits at the 95% CL on the visible cross section in the muon+neutrino channel as a function of the transverse mass threshold.
Product of acceptance and efficiency for the electron and muon selections as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Expected upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for generic $W^\prime$ production and decay to the electron+neutrino channel as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Expected upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for generic $W^\prime$ production and decay to the muon+neutrino channel as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
Combined (electron and muon channels) expected upper limits at the 95% CL on the cross section for generic $W^\prime$ production and decay to a single lepton generation as a function of the $W^\prime$ pole mass.
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance on the query string syntax can also be found in the OpenSearch documentation.
We support searching for a range of records using their HEPData record ID or Inspire ID.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status
Email
Forum
Twitter
GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.