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

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

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

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

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

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

Measured and expected signal strength μ for EW ZV production.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The $v_{3}\{2,\lvert\Delta\eta\rvert>2\}$ ratios for charged particles as functions of centrality in NeNe to OO collisions at 5.36 TeV.

Distributions in the trailing lepton pt for the DY CR after a fit to the data.

Distributions in the trailing lepton pt for the tt CR after a fit to the data.

Likelihood scan of the signal strengths for tWZ and ttZ production. The black cross shows the best fit value, while the black diamond indicates the SM expected value. The con- tours in different shades of blue correspond to the 68, 95, and 99% confidence level.

Observed differential dijet spectrum using full Run-2 data.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for quark-quark type dijet resonances.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for quark-gluon type dijet resonances.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for gluon-gluon type dijet resonances.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the universal quark coupling $g_{q}'$ as a function of resonance mass for a leptophobic Z' resonance that only couples to quarks.

v_{3}{4}/v_{3}{2} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions and ratios of XeXe/PbPb.

Normalized symmetric cumulant NSC(2,3) as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions and ratios of XeXe/PbPb.

Normalized symmetric cumulant NSC(2,4) as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions and ratios of XeXe/PbPb.

Three-harmonic symmetric cumulant SC(2,3,4) and normalized symmetric cumulant NSC(2,3,4) as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Three-harmonic symmetric cumulant SC(2,3,5) as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Three-harmonic normalized symmetric cumulant NSC(2,3,5) as a function of centrality in XeXe collisions.

Three-harmonic normalized symmetric cumulant NSC(2,3,5) as a function of centrality in PbPb collisions.

Three-harmonic symmetric cumulant SC(3,4,5) as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Three-harmonic symmetric cumulant SC(2,4,6) as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Six-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{4}, v_{3}^{2} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Six-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{2}, v_{3}^{4} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Six-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{4}, v_{4}^{2} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Six-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{2}, v_{4}^{4} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Eight-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{6}, v_{3}^{2} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Eight-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{4}, v_{3}^{4} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Eight-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{2}, v_{3}^{6} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Eight-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{6}, v_{4}^{2} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Eight-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{4}, v_{4}^{4} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Eight-particle normalized mixed harmonic cumulant nMHC(v_{2}^{2}, v_{4}^{6} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Two-particle correlations v_{4}{2} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions and ratios of XeXe/PbPb.

Four-particle cumulants v_{2}{4} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Four-particle cumulants v_{3}{4} as a function of centrality in XeXe and PbPb collisions.

Measured $\frac{d\sigma}{d(-t^{\prime})}~[\mathrm{nb/GeV^{2}}]$ for reaction $\gamma p\to \{\Lambda \bar{\Lambda}\} p$ including data of $6.5 \leq E_{\gamma} \leq 11.5$ [GeV], splitted in 10 energy bins (each as a column in the table). The observable $(-t^{\prime})$ is in unit of $[\mathrm{nb/GeV^{2}}]$ and is divided into bins of width 0.03 $[\mathrm{GeV^{2}}]$ (each as a row in the table). The global systematic uncertainty is 19% (not included in the table), with contributions of 5% from kinematic fitting, 10% from data selection, 5% from flux normalization, 13% from tracking efficiency, 3% from model dependence, and 6% from run-period variations.

Measured $\frac{d\sigma}{d(-t^{\prime})}~[\mathrm{nb/GeV^{2}}]$ for reaction $\gamma p\to \{p \bar{\Lambda}\} \Lambda$ including data of $6.5 \leq E_{\gamma} \leq 11.5$ [GeV], splitted in 10 energy bins (each as a column in the table). The observable $(-t^{\prime})$ is in unit of $[\mathrm{nb/GeV^{2}}]$ and is divided into bins of width 0.075 $[\mathrm{GeV^{2}}]$ (each as a row in the table). The global systematic uncertainty is 22% (not included in the table), with contributions of 2% from kinematic fitting, 10% from data selection, 5% from flux normalization, 15% from tracking efficiency, 3% from model dependence, and 10% from run-period variations.

Measured $\frac{d\sigma}{d(-t^{\prime})}~[\mathrm{nb/GeV^{2}}]$ for reaction $\gamma p\to \{p \bar{p}\} p$ including data of $6.5 \leq E_{\gamma} \leq 11.5$ [GeV], splitted in 10 energy bins (each as a column in the table). The observable $(-t^{\prime})$ is in unit of $[\mathrm{nb/GeV^{2}}]$ and is divided into bins of width 0.01 $[\mathrm{GeV^{2}}]$ (each as a row in the table). The global systematic uncertainty is 13% (not included in the table), with contributions of 8% from kinematic fitting, 4% from data selection, 5% from flux normalization, 8% from tracking efficiency, 3% from model dependence, and 1% from run-period variations.

Measured $\frac{d\sigma}{d(-t^{\prime})}~[\mathrm{nb/GeV^{2}}]$ for reaction $\gamma p\to \{p \bar{p}\} p$ including data of $3.5 \leq E_{\gamma} \leq 6.0$ [GeV], splitted in 5 energy bins (each as a column in the table). The observable $(-t^{\prime})$ is in unit of $[\mathrm{nb/GeV^{2}}]$ and is divided into bins of width 0.1 $[\mathrm{GeV^{2}}]$ (each as a row in the table). The global systematic uncertainty is 13% (not included in the table), with contributions of 8% from kinematic fitting, 4% from data selection, 5% from flux normalization, 8% from tracking efficiency, 3% from model dependence, and 1% from run-period variations.

Measured total cross section $\sigma(\gamma\,p\to\{\Lambda\bar{\Lambda}\}p)$ in unit of [nb] with beam energy in the range $5.0 < E_{\gamma} < 11.5~[\mathrm{GeV}]$ with various bin width. The table only includes point-to-point statistical uncertainties. The global systematic uncertainty is 19% (not included in the table), with contributions of 5% from kinematic fitting, 10% from data selection, 5% from flux normalization, 13% from tracking efficiency, 3% from model dependence, and 6% from run-period variations.

Measured total cross section $\sigma(\gamma\,p\to\{p\bar{\Lambda}\}\Lambda)$ in unit of [nb] with beam energy in the range $5.0 < E_{\gamma} < 11.5~[\mathrm{GeV}]$ with various bin width. The table only includes point-to-point statistical uncertainties. The global systematic uncertainty is 22% (not included in the table), with contributions of 2% from kinematic fitting, 10% from data selection, 5% from flux normalization, 15% from tracking efficiency, 3% from model dependence, and 10% from run-period variations.

Measured total cross section $\sigma(\gamma\,p\to\{p\bar{p}\}p)$ in unit of [nb] with beam energy in the range $3.5 < E_{\gamma} < 11.5~[\mathrm{GeV}]$ with various bin width. The table only includes point-to-point statistical uncertainties. The global systematic uncertainty is 13% (not included in the table), with contributions of 8% from kinematic fitting, 4% from data selection, 5% from flux normalization, 8% from tracking efficiency, 3% from model dependence, and 1% from run-period variations.

Normalized differential distributions of the $\Delta R (\gamma,\mathrm{tt})$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process.

Absolute differential distributions of the min. $\Delta R (\gamma,\mathrm{t})$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process.

Normalized differential distributions of the min. $\Delta R (\gamma,\mathrm{t})$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process.

Absolute differential distributions of the $m(\mathrm{tt})$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process.

Normalized differential distributions of the $m(\mathrm{tt})$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process.

Absolute differential distributions of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The theory predictions are computed at fixed order, at NLO in QCD, as described in Section 9.2 of the paper.

Normalized differential distributions of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The theory predictions are computed at fixed order, at NLO in QCD, as described in Section 9.2 of the paper.

Absolute differential distributions of the photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The theory predictions are computed at fixed order, at NLO in QCD, as described in Section 9.2 of the paper.

Normalized differential distributions of the photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The theory predictions are computed at fixed order, at NLO in QCD, as described in Section 9.2 of the paper.

Absolute differential distributions of the $\Delta \phi (\ell,\ell)$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The theory predictions are computed at fixed order, at NLO in QCD, as described in Section 9.2 of the paper.

Normalized differential distributions of the $\Delta \phi (\ell,\ell)$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The theory predictions are computed at fixed order, at NLO in QCD, as described in Section 9.2 of the paper.

Absolute differential distributions of the ratio between the cross sections of $\mathrm{tt\gamma}$ and $\mathrm{tt}$, as a function of the leading top quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process.

Absolute differential distributions of the ratio between the cross sections of $\mathrm{tt\gamma}$ and $\mathrm{tt}$, as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$. The nominal MC prediction used to compare the experimental results to is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and Madgraph5 at LO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The alternative prediction is obtained with Madgraph5 at NLO in QCD for photons from the production part of the process and a POWHEG+Pythia $\mathrm{tt}$ simulation at NLO in QCD for photons from the decay part of the process. The theory predictions are computed at fixed order, at NLO in QCD, as described in Section 9.2 of the paper.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the leading top quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the leading top quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the $\Delta R (\gamma,\mathrm{tt})$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the $\Delta R (\gamma,\mathrm{tt})$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the min. $\Delta R (\gamma,\mathrm{t})$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the min. $\Delta R (\gamma,\mathrm{t})$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the $m(\mathrm{tt})$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the $m(\mathrm{tt})$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the $\Delta \phi (\ell,\ell)$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of the $\Delta \phi (\ell,\ell)$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential $\mathrm{tt\gamma}$ / $\mathrm{tt}$ cross section ratio as a function of the leading top $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential $\mathrm{tt\gamma}$ / $\mathrm{tt}$ cross section ratio as a function of the leading top $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainty in the absolute differential $\mathrm{tt\gamma}$ / $\mathrm{tt}$ cross section ratio as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential $\mathrm{tt\gamma}$ / $\mathrm{tt}$ cross section ratio as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$.